intramuralist ™

Sometimes it seems like religion gets a really bad rap. Whether it’s the intensifying persecution Christians face in places like North Korea, Somalia, Eritrea, and Nigeria, the spike in antisemitic incidents around the world, or even the rising hostility toward the American church.

But maybe the real issue isn’t religion itself. Maybe the problem is that many of us have forgotten what religion actually is—and how different it is from faith.

My sense is that we tend to take the word religion and define it only by its most common meaning…

religion | rəˈlij(ə)n | n. – the belief in and worship of a superhuman power or powers, especially a God or gods.

But embedded in almost every definition of the word is another meaning — and arguably one that is just as accurate, if not more relevant…

religion | rəˈlij(ə)n | n. – a pursuit or interest to which someone ascribes supreme importance.

In other words, to be religious about something is to treat it as ultimate — to give it our attention, our loyalty, our energy. It’s something we return to again and again. Something that organizes our lives. I can be religious about my exercise routine or about eating my vegetables.

So the real question becomes: what are the things to which we ascribe supreme importance. For example (and certainly not an exhaustive list)…

Our politics…
For some, political ideology or national identity becomes the highest good—something worth defending at all costs. Loyalty to ideas like Liberalism, Nationalism, or Socialism can shape a person’s entire worldview and sense of purpose.

Our wealth, status, or economic success…
Money, career advancement, or financial security can easily become the central pursuit that structures someone’s life. Success and accumulation become the measures by which everything else is judged. I mean zero judgment here—I simply wonder what the relationships are like for someone whose religion is economic status.

Social causes…
People often devote enormous emotional energy and moral conviction to movements, organizations, or causes they see as ultimate priorities. That can be admirable. The challenge comes when the pursuit becomes so religious—so narrow—that it becomes impossible to see any good in another perspective.

Knowledge or intellectual authority…
For some, the pursuit of knowledge or the authority of expert consensus becomes the highest guiding principle—something trusted to explain reality and determine what is true. I understand the impulse; a zealous pursuit of knowledge can have great benefits. But it’s also clear there are some things we simply cannot know without divine revelation.

Pleasure…
Modern culture often elevates personal happiness or self-expression as the ultimate goal of life. What makes us happy? Just because something makes us happy doesn’t necessarily make us good. Sometimes religion can actually get in the way.

And lastly, for this non-exhaustive list…

Community and belonging…
In some cases, loyalty to a group—whether cultural, national, or even recreational—can become the central organizing commitment in a person’s life. It can at times cause us to lose sight of other things that are equally worthy.

Most of us organize our lives around something we consider ultimate. So the real question isn’t whether we’re religious. The real question is what our religion actually is.

Religion and faith simply aren’t the same thing.

Respectfully…
AR

As is no secret, the Intramuralist is a big fan of questions. Long time readers will know we favor it because it’s the only punctuation piece that begs a response; we value respectful dialogue. True, too, is that the tool doesn’t demand that another thinks like us; it’s more a “let’s figure this out together.”

Hence, with the current intensity of the conflict in Iran, there are lots of questions. Here are the recent headlines that have made bias secondary to knowing what’s actually true:

1. Can Aid Groups Reach Civilians in War-Torn Iranian Cities? (Reuters)
2. Can Diplomacy Still Stop the Iran War? (Reuters)
3. Could China Step In to Support Iran Diplomatically? (Reuters)
4. Could Internal Protests Destabilize Iran During the War? (Reuters)
5. Could Iran Close the Strait of Hormuz? (Bloomberg)
6. Could Iran Launch Cyberattacks Against the United States? (Reuters)
7. Could Iranian Drone Attacks Escalate Further? (Fox News)
8. Could Iranian Proxies Target American Troops in the Region? (CNN)
9. Could NATO Be Dragged Into the Iran War? (Reuters)
10. Could Negotiations Restart During the War? (The Guardian)
11. Could Russia Help Iran Militarily? (Reuters)
12. Could the Conflict Push Oil Prices Above $100 a Barrel? (Bloomberg)
13. Could the Conflict Trigger a Global Recession? (CNBC)
14. Could the Iran Conflict Spread to Lebanon and Iraq? (BBC)
15. Could the Iran War Become America’s Next Long Conflict? (The Hill)
16. Could the Iran War Expand Into a Regional Conflict? (Associated Press)
17. Could the Strait of Hormuz Crisis Disrupt Global Trade? (CNBC)
18. Could the War Bring Down Iran’s Government? (Washington Post)
19. Could the War Trigger a New Refugee Crisis? (BBC)
20. Could the War With Iran Shift U.S. Military Focus From China? (Foreign Policy)
21. Did the President Need Congressional Approval for Strikes on Iran? (Washington Post)
22. Did the U.S. Miscalculate Iran’s Response? (NBC News)
23. How Many Civilians Have Been Killed in the Iran War? (The Guardian)
24. How Will the Iran War Affect U.S. Gas Prices? (USA Today)
25. Is Israel Preparing for a Longer War With Iran? (Al Jazeera)
26. Is Iran Facing a Succession Crisis After Its Leadership Losses? (Financial Times)
27. Is Regime Change in Iran a Realistic Outcome? (The Atlantic)
28. Is the FBI Preparing for Iran-Linked Attacks Inside the U.S.? (Fox News)
29. Is the Iran Conflict Creating a Humanitarian Disaster? (Al Jazeera)
30. Is the Middle East on the Brink of a Regional War? (BBC)
31. Is the U.S. Heading Toward a Wider War With Iran? (CNN)
32. Is the U.S. Preparing to Send Ground Troops to Iran? (New York Post)
33. Is the U.S. Strategy in Iran Working? (Politico)
34. Is Washington Ready for Iranian Retaliation? (CNN)
35. What Does the War in Iran Mean for Global Oil Prices? (Reuters)
36. What Happens If the Strait of Hormuz Closes? (Bloomberg)
37. What Would a Ceasefire Between Iran and the U.S. Look Like? (Politico)
38. What Would Victory in the Iran War Look Like? (Reuters)
39. Who Would Lead Iran If the Current Regime Falls? (BBC)
40. Will Hezbollah Join the War Against Israel? (BBC)
41. Will Iran Escalate Attacks on U.S. Bases? (Newsweek)
42. Will Iran Target Gulf States Next? (CNBC)
43. Will Iran’s Allies Rally to Defend the Regime? (CNN)
44. Will Iran’s Military Leadership Fracture Under Pressure? (Al Jazeera)
45. Will Markets Panic Over the Iran Conflict? (Reuters)
46. Will Russia or China Broker Peace in the Conflict? (BBC)
47. Will Sanctions and War Collapse Iran’s Economy? (Financial Times)
48. Will Shipping Through the Gulf Be Disrupted? (Financial Times)
49. Will the Iran War End Quickly or Drag On? (Newsweek)
50. Will the Pentagon Expand the Air Campaign in Iran? (Defense News)

Praying for this to end soon and for wisdom to prevail. There are indeed lots of questions.

Respectfully…

AR

“I, (name), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. (So help me God).”

Upon enlisting in the U.S. Armed Forces, each person takes the above oath of enlistment.

It is a solemn, binding promise that includes the following:

• A promise to protect American values, rights, and the rule of law, not a person.
• Obedience to the President and officers appointed over them.
• A voluntary promise to put the nation and its people first.
• An understanding they may be required to make the ultimate sacrifice for their country.

Six who once bravely and boldly took that oath were:

Nicole Amor
Declan Coady
Cody Khork
Jeffrey O’Brien
Robert Marzan
Noah Tietjens

These captains, sergeants, majors and more — ages 20 to 54 — from California to Iowa, Florida and elsewhere — were killed at the onset of Operation Epic Fury.

While these deaths occurred in Kuwait, the soldiers were attacked by Iranian drones as part of a wide-scale retaliatory campaign. For the first time in history, Tehran targeted all six members of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), a political and economic union of six Arab states bordering the Persian Gulf which aims to foster economic, security, and cultural cooperation among its monarchies. Iran targeted them in addition to several other U.S. regional partners.

Just because their deaths happened thousands of miles away from most of us, I don’t want there to be any out-of-sight-out-of-mind mentality. Those persons’ innocent lives were lost. Every life has a name. Every name has a story. And every story matters to God.

Behind each of those names are families who love them deeply. There are parents who raised them, friends who laughed with them, coworkers who trusted them, and communities who will forever feel their absence. Their lives were full of moments that mattered long before this moment ever arrived.

When someone raises their right hand and takes that oath, they know there are risks. They understand that service can ask a great deal of them. Yet they step forward anyway — not because it’s easy, but because they believe in serving something bigger than themselves. That kind of selflessness deserves our gratitude and remembrance.

When I think about the men and women who admirably serve this country, I’m reminded that they come from every background and every viewpoint imaginable. They don’t all vote the same way. They don’t all think the same way. But they still stand shoulder to shoulder in service. Maybe there’s something we can learn from that.

Maybe the best way we can honor those who serve — and those we have lost — is by remembering that we’re all in this together. By speaking a little more kindly. By listening a little more patiently. By refusing to let politics turn neighbors into enemies. We can’t control the conflicts that occur in distant places, but we can control the spirit we bring to our own communities.

Nicole. Declan. Cody. Jeffrey. Robert. And Noah.

May their service never be forgotten. May their families be surrounded by love and support. And may their memory remind us to value one another a little more.

Respectfully…

AR

Wow… this may be the best thing I’ve heard in a while. Not just the best, but maybe one of the most widely relevant for us all.

But first, allow us three brief but necessary definitions. Let’s define curious, condemning, and to condemn.

And also…

One of the blessings of this age and stage of life is that I have multiple wise and wonderful friends who are established, mental health professionals. Among them are psychiatrists, psychologists, social workers and counselors who have years of seasoned experience and insight. They have some excellent things to say.

This week in one of my interactions, one shared one of those nuggets of truth that I knew I needed to hold onto. It was simple, but so poignant. So true. And so wanting for all to know.

She said it’s impossible to be curious and condemning at the same time.

Let me say that again…

It’s impossible to be curious and condemning at the same time.

Without a doubt, in this heightened, polarizing culture we live in, there is a ton of condemnation… a plethora of expressing unfavorable or adverse judgment of another… not just for what people do, but sadly, for who they are.

It makes me think…

We have lost our pursuit of curiosity. We have dismissed its value, its beauty and its need. When we are curious of another, we seek to understand, to learn and to know. We recognize there is always more we need to know. What a gift curiosity proves to be.

There is wisdom, therefore, in being a curious people. 

Sounds like something essential to work on.

Respectfully…

AR

Saturday was a sobering day. Many of us woke up to the news that the U.S. and Israel had launched coordinated strikes across Iran in “Operation Epic Fury,” targeting ballistic missile and nuclear infrastructure. The stated goal: eliminate future Iranian threats and stop any pursuit of nuclear weapons. Pres. Trump also defined success as something more sweeping — the Iranian people rising up and ending the current regime.

Before we rush to our corners, it’s worth stating two things plainly.

First: the Iranian regime is oppressive. That’s not partisan rhetoric; that’s well-documented reality.

For years, organizations like Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and the United Nations have detailed what life under the Islamic Republic often entails:

• Frequent use of the death penalty, including for non-violent crimes.
• Security forces using deadly force against protestors.
• Reports of torture and psychological abuse in detention.
• Punishments such as flogging and amputation permitted under law.
• Arbitrary arrests without clear charges or due process.
• Courts lacking independence and full transparency.
• Restricted access to independent legal counsel in political cases.
• Criminalization of speech critical of authorities.
• Journalists harassed, detained, or imprisoned.
• Peaceful protests forcibly broken up.
• Severe limits on civic groups, unions, and activists.
• Discrimination against religious minorities.
• State monitoring of online activity and personal communications.
• Legal inequalities affecting certain groups disproportionately.
• Women facing legal inequities in family law, inheritance, travel, and mandatory dress requirements.

When protests intensified last December, the regime reportedly responded with escalated force and even cut off internet access. Whatever one thinks about foreign policy, it’s hard to argue that this is a system characterized by broad civil liberty.

Second: most of us have an extremely limited perspective on what just happened. We scroll headlines. We react. We debate. But we are not in intelligence briefings. We do not see classified assessments. We do not sit with military planners weighing options that likely all carry serious risk. That doesn’t mean citizens shouldn’t have opinions. It does mean we should hold them with humility.

It’s also worth remembering that what Pres. Trump did is not historically unique. Military action without formal congressional approval has precedent across administrations, such as:

• George H. W. Bush in Panama (1989)
• Bill Clinton in Kosovo (1999)
• Barack Obama in Libya (2011)
• Joe Biden in Syria and Iraq (2021–2024)

One can argue about constitutionality. One can debate prudence. But this pattern did not begin on Saturday.

That’s why the day feels sad and sobering to me.

Not because I have fully resolved whether the strikes were right or wrong. Not because I align neatly with one political tribe or the other. But because at some point, people who know far more than I do concluded that military force was the least bad option available. And that is always sobering.

War means risk. It means unintended consequences. It means innocent lives in danger. Even when confronting a repressive regime, the human cost is real.

So yes — Iran’s government is oppressive. Yes — the suffering of its people is documented and ongoing. And yes — American presidents of both parties have used military force without Congress formally declaring war. We can acknowledge all of that at once.

God be with us. May casualties and innocent life on all sides be minimized. And may truth always prevail.

Soberly…
AR

I have one more thought about the Olympics that just wrapped up. Typically, of course, I have many thoughts. But as I watched the final scheduled event of the XXV Olympic Winter Games, I found myself captivated by more than just the competition.

It was men’s ice hockey. USA vs. Canada, with Canada entering as the slight but solid favorite. In a thrilling finish for Americans (especially those watching early on a Sunday morning), the USA defeated their North American rivals with a winning goal less than two minutes into overtime.

The joy was immediate and unmistakable. Gloves and sticks flew into the air. Teammates raced across the ice toward one another, elated at what they had just accomplished. American gold in this event hadn’t been achieved since the infamous “Miracle on Ice” 46 years, to-the-day earlier. The thrill of victory was obvious, loud, and contagious.

With cheers echoing through the arena — high fives, hugs, hugely wide smiles — officials prepared for the medal ceremony. The joy seemed only to swell as the crowd awaited what would come next.

And that’s where I noticed something that transcended sports.

Three teams were honored. Finland stepped up first, calmly and happily receiving their well-earned bronze after securing it the day before. The Finns’ pride was notable — steady and deserved.

The United States went last. They were gleeful — smiling, laughing, playfully interacting. Special recognition was given to goaltender Connor Hellebuyck for his remarkable saves and to slightly toothless Jack Hughes, the player who scored the iconic overtime goal. As they received their medals, many glanced down at the gold resting on their chests, perhaps in awe. It was a moment of “wow — look what we’ve done!”

But before the Americans were honored, the Canadian team lined up to receive their silver medals. And that’s what struck me most.

Silver signifies second in the world. It represents extraordinary achievement and elite athletic excellence. And yet, in that immediate moment, the Canadians looked anything but honored.

There were no smiles. No playful exchanges. No admiring glance at the medal newly placed around their necks. The collective mood felt far more somber than celebratory, as it was more a  moment of “wow — I can’t believe what we could not do.”

Let me be clear: there is no judgment. It’s simply an observation. In that tender, immediate moment, the deep disappointment of not winning seemed louder than the accomplishment of finishing second in the world. It was disappointment, failure… maybe even shame.

Such is a curious thing. Zig Ziglar often said, “Disappointment is a temporary detour on the road to success.” It aligns with the familiar wisdom that this, too, shall pass. The way a person feels right now is not the way they will or must always feel… no matter how big the moment may be.

So my prayer for the Canadian men’s hockey team — and perhaps for all of us — is that when the moment is no longer so raw, when the cameras have turned away and the arena has emptied, the dense fog of deep disappointment clears.

And when it does, may there be recognition — not of what wasn’t, but of what was.

Second in the world.

What a remarkable thing.

Respectfully…

AR

As the XXV Olympic Winter Games come to a close, a few things we will be certain to remember… although first, there may be some to forget…

One hopes to forget those unfortunate moments of controversy… such as the unusual question regarding male ski jumpers and how they allegedly used a few extra bodily injections to create a bit of a crotch sail, improving their aerodynamics… 

… or the heated dispute between Canada and Sweden, in which the Canadian curler was accused of “double-touching” the stone (illegally touching the stone after releasing it). While denying cheating despite circulating video that appeared to show otherwise, his expletive-laden response wasn’t so helpful in making him either believable or even respected… 

… but also the discrepancy in the ice dancer scoring, in which the French judge scored the French dancers unusually higher than the heavy American favorites, even though errors were obvious and he was an outlier of a judge…

It wasn’t just the controversy that we wish not to remember. There were also some notably lamentable performances, starting with American Lindsay Vonn, who had most of the world cheering for a hopeful Olympic comeback at age 41, but who then crashed only 13 seconds into the women’s downhill skiing event…

… there was also the men’s skater, heavily favored to win gold, Ilia Malinin — aka the self-named “Quad God” — who fell multiple times in the free skate, finishing a shocking 8th. Unlike the Canadian curler, no less, he was sensed to have handled the agony of defeat both respectfully and well.

More fun to remember are the following…

… American Alysa Liu, who was thought to maybe be only the second or third best female representing the USA in her sport, turning heads and axels while winning the women’s figure skating gold, jumping joyfully up and down, marking the first U.S. gold in the event since 2002. Her joy was contagious…

… or Norway’s Johannes Høsflot Klæbo, who was simply amazing. He achieved what many would consider impossible — winning an unprecedented six gold medals in six different events — and prompting us all to join in the family celebration, when he embraced his 82-year-old grandfather and lifelong coach after the 50km victory. What another great joy.

But perhaps what this Olympic observer will most both celebrate and remember is the story of Team USA bobsledder Elana Meyers Taylor. At 41, she captured her first-ever Olympic gold in the women’s monobob (no doubt a fun word to say).

The best part, though, wasn’t the gold medal nor her age nor how she is now the most decorated US female bobsledder in history. 

The best part — the most memorable part — was watching the reaction and joy of her family…

Elana is married to former US bobsledder Nic Taylor. They have two sons, Nico, who is 5, and Noah, who is 3. Both children are deaf, and Nico has Down syndrome. The boys were both present at the 2026 games, watching their mother compete in the Olympics for the first time.

After finishing the race, Elana dropped to her knees and immediately signed “Mommy won!” to her boys.

Noah was spotted in the stands signing “Mom” and “champion.” 

Hugs were soon shared all around.

With Elana often describing her sons as her “biggest motivators,” when we think of what’s most memorable — coupled by our desire to focus on all that is good and right and true — how sweet to remember the story of Elana Meyers Taylor and her inspiring, most beautiful family.

Way to go, Elana… way to go…

AR

Jeffrey Epstein was a wealthy financier accused of horrific crimes involving the sexual exploitation of minors. His legal troubles became public in Florida in the mid-2000s. In 2008, he entered into a controversial non-prosecution agreement, pleaded guilty to state charges involving a minor, and avoided federal prosecution at the time. That deal has rightly faced intense public scrutiny ever since.

In July 2019, Epstein was arrested in New York on federal sex-trafficking charges. A month later, he died in jail while awaiting trial. The medical examiner ruled his death a suicide, yet public debate has continued; the circumstances left many people with questions as to whether the death was actually self-inflicted.

Now the focus has shifted to what are often called “the Epstein files.” That phrase covers a wide range of materials: court records, flight logs, depositions, contact books, investigative files, and documents connected to related prosecutions, including that of British socialite and Epstein associate, Ghislaine Maxwell, who was convicted in 2021 of sex trafficking and conspiracy.

These files have indeed become a political football. At times it seems each side raises the issue when it’s convenient. My aim, no less, isn’t to accuse or defend any person or party. It’s to seek the truth — carefully, patiently and resisting the lure to make the uncertain certain.

So I sit with a few questions:

Given the terrible harm Epstein caused, was his case handled the way it would have been if he weren’t wealthy and well-connected?

Were victims truly heard and protected from the beginning?

Across the Obama, Trump, and Biden administrations, what has kept the full set of files from being released?

Are documents still being withheld, and can the reasons be clearly explained?

How do we pursue transparency without causing further harm to victims?

What needs to happen next to ensure accountability and rebuild public trust?

There is no public evidence that a single administration fully possessed a complete, releasable file and intentionally suppressed it for partisan gain. At the same time, critics across the political spectrum argue that greater transparency could have been pursued.

Too often, discussion of this case becomes a partisan weapon. It is framed as proof of corruption tied to one ideology or another. Yet Epstein’s social and financial circles crossed political and cultural lines. If this were simply a Democrat or Republican problem, the story likely would have broken cleanly along those lines long ago. It hasn’t.

There are things we know. Epstein ran a network that exploited underage girls. His 2008 plea deal was unusually lenient. He associated with powerful and prominent individuals.

There are also things we don’t know. Whether additional crimes were committed by others but never charged. Whether all relevant evidence has been fully investigated. Whether any institutions failed in ways not yet disclosed.

Speculation fills the gaps. But speculation is not proof.

There is documented wrongdoing. There are documented associations. There are also unproven allegations and real uncertainty. Holding those distinctions matters.

May we be people who seek truth without fear — and who resist the temptation to turn unanswered questions into settled conclusions, however compelling that may feel.

Respectfully…

AR

I hope as this blog is posted, it becomes irrelevant. I pray in the time this is written, she is found. I can’t imagine…

I can’t imagine what it would be like to have your 84 year old mother missing, to have no idea where she is, to believe she was kidnapped, to not know if she’s alive and well or even ok for that matter…

I can’t imagine the grief, the uncertainty and so much more…

What I appreciate amidst the heartache is the collective, national sadness. What an awful thing to not know where Nancy Guthrie is.

Nancy is the mother of “Today” co-anchor Savannah Guthrie. 

She was reported missing on February 1st. The FBI and local authorities are investigating thousands of tips as we speak. As of this writing, authorities were searching for a male suspect seen on surveillance video, described as 5’9” to 5’10” with an average build, wearing a dark backpack.

Nancy has long been known to her friends and family for her resilience and faith. 

Interestingly, there is another prominent Nancy Guthrie also known for her faith, who is a well-known author, teacher and encourager, but is not the daughter of a well-liked celebrity.

While again, knowing they are not the same, I am struck by some of the author Guthrie’s words and how relevant they are today…

“Trusting God when the miracle does not come, when the urgent prayer gets no answer, when there is only darkness—this is the kind of faith God values perhaps most of all. This is the kind of faith that can be developed and displayed only in the midst of difficult circumstances. This is the kind of faith that cannot be shaken because it is the result of having been shaken.”

“Lord, sometimes the possibility of coming catastrophe can make our family terribly afraid. We’re tempted to ask you only to protect us from difficulty, but what we really want is to be a family who lives by faith in the midst of the worst of circumstances.”

“But here’s what grieving people wish others would understand: grief is incredibly, relentlessly lonely. It really makes a huge difference to be reminded that we are not forgotten, that our loss is on the radar of people around us.”

“Peace is a gift of God, but we prepare ourselves to receive this gift as we pray about everything, cultivate gratitude, and refuse to surrender to worry. You can emerge from your days of sorrow with a heart that has been softened to the Spirit of God—what a beautiful and profitable experience that will be! Or you can allow your heart to be hardened by bitterness and resentment toward God, and rejection of his peace and grace—what a dark place that will take you to . . . a place far away from the loving embrace of God… Heart Mender, take this broken heart of mine and make it soft and sensitive to your Spirit. I want to stay close to you and soft toward you.”

Thinking of both Nancy’s now… trying to be hopeful… God be with us all.

Soberly…

AR

“Everything’s a conversation,” meaning, we can talk about it. Hang around me long enough, you’re bound to hear said statement. There is nothing we can’t talk about. That doesn’t mean the exchange will be easy nor simple nor even all that pleasant. What it does mean, though, is that we value one another enough to graciously interact, listen well and work to understand what the other is thinking and feeling.

One of the reasons it seems we are currently collectively struggling to solve the current immigration issues is because we are unable to have a conversation. And because we can’t actually talk about it, we are trapped by political paralysis — a scenario in which nothing is solved and the rhetorical temps only continue to rise.

So let’s bring down the temp. Let’s converse. As long advocated here, the best conversations often begin with open-ended, thought-provoking questions. Such an approach invites curiosity and reflection. Such an approach also discourages any semblance of the always unattractive, fleetingly persuasive, hell and brimstone approach. No wise conversation relies on fear, threats nor vulgarity. Wise conversation motivates instead through understanding and encouragement. 

What are the questions we should be asking and answering in regard to national security, our borders, ICE and immigration? 

Let’s Try to Actually Solve This

1. When we say “border security,” what do we actually mean — and how would we know if we’re getting it right?
2. What should immigration policy balance at the same time: safety, fairness, economic need, and basic humanity — and where do those goals collide?
3. Where have both parties leaned on slogans instead of solutions?

National Security (Without the Hype)

4. What border-related security risks are real, and which ones get more airtime than evidence?
5. How do we improve screening and vetting without treating every migrant like a threat?
6. What do the actual crime and security data show — and where are we still guessing?
7. How well do national security agencies, DHS, and border enforcement actually work together?

Managing the Border Like a System

8. What mix of walls, technology, personnel, and law changes actually works best per dollar spent?
9. If apprehension numbers aren’t the right scorecard, what is?
10. What policies failed under both Democrat and Republican presidents — and why?
11. How do we stop governing the border in “crisis mode” every few years?

ICE & Interior Enforcement

12. What should ICE’s job be, and where has that mission gotten blurry?
13. How do we enforce the law consistently while still protecting due process?
14. What kind of oversight would build trust without tying enforcement in knots?
15. Given limited resources, who should ICE realistically prioritize?

Fixing the Immigration System

16. How can we revamp legal immigration so fewer people feel forced to cross illegally?
17. What role should work visas play in easing border pressure and helping the economy?
18. How much of the current mess is caused by massive backlogs and slow processing?
19. How do we protect real asylum seekers while discouraging abuse of the system?

Accountability & Moving Forward

20. When immigration policy fails, who actually owns that failure — Congress, the White House, or both?
21. What clear metrics should be used to judge whether a policy is working?
22. How do we write laws that don’t fall apart every time global conditions change?
23. What compromises cross a line by clearly harming security or human dignity?
24. Where do most Americans already agree, even if politicians don’t?
25. If we were serious, what would a bipartisan 10-year plan look like — and how would we keep it from collapsing on contact with politics?

Just asking questions, friends… and of course, attempting to foster authentic, sincere, solution-oriented conversation.

Respectfully…

AR