In this episode of Washington Watch, join Tony Perkins as he delves into the complexities of the United States’ military actions against Iran. Featuring exclusive insights from political leaders and experts, the discussion uncovers the challenges and justifications behind these decisions, including constitutional authority and the moral imperatives that guide such actions. Special guests examine the historical tensions between the U.S. and Iran, and how current events shape geopolitical strategies.
SPEAKER 07 :
from the heart of our nation’s capital in Washington, D.C., bringing compelling interviews, insightful analysis, taking you beyond the headlines and soundbites into conversations with our nation’s leaders and newsmakers, all from a biblical worldview. Washington Watch with Tony Perkins starts now.
SPEAKER 30 :
We’re going to continue to do well. We have the greatest military in the world by far. That was a tremendous threat to us for many years. 47 years they’ve been killing our people and killing people from all over the world. And I think we have great support. And I think if we didn’t do it first, they would have done it to Israel. And give us a shot if that was possible.
SPEAKER 15 :
That was President Donald Trump earlier today praising the performance of the U.S. military in its operations against Iran. Welcome to this March 4th edition of Washington Watch. I’m Tony Perkins. Thanks so much for joining us. Well, coming up, as the White House expands the U.S. military’s presence in the Middle East, Democrats are questioning President Trump’s constitutional authority. Senate took an initial vote today on the War Powers Resolution, which failed. North Dakota Senator Kevin Cramer joins us in just a moment to look at the Senate vote and Operation Epic Fury. Plus, as Congress debates the constitutional authority for the president’s actions against Iran, we also need to consider the moral dimensions of the decision. When and under what conditions should a nation go to war? It’s a question that Christian thinkers have wrestled with for centuries in the light of Scripture. Dr. Mark Levecky joins me for that discussion. Well, the White House is expanding the U.S. military’s presence in the Middle East as the conflict with Iran enters its fifth day. U.S. officials say additional forces, including naval and air assets, are being deployed to support ongoing operations. Earlier today, Defense Secretary Pete Hexek said that a U.S. submarine sank an Iranian warship in the Indian Ocean. marking a significant escalation. And by the way, this is the first time a U.S. submarine has sunk a combatant ship since the end of World War II in 1945. Joining me now is Washington Stand reporter Casey Harper. All right, Casey, what’s the latest? This obviously seems to be developing by the moment.
SPEAKER 13 :
That’s right, Tony. We’re covering every development. And as you said, things are intensifying in Iran. In fact, we’re seeing media reports now that the thousands of Kurds are actually pushing into Iran, which is really breaking media reports, we’re saying. But as you said, at a briefing earlier today at the Pentagon, Secretary Hegseth made clear that the U.S. is winning this war against Iran and that the U.S. military could fight as long as needed. In fact, today, as you mentioned, the Department of War released that video, pretty remarkable video, really, showing an Iranian warship flying several feet into the air as it’s struck by a torpedo fired by a U.S. submarine. Now, that vessel sank off the coast of Sri Lanka in international waters, which, as you mentioned, the first time we have done something like that since 1945. Now, Hegseth vowed continued and intensifying military pressure on Iran, which is what we have been seeing. In fact, here’s a clip.
SPEAKER 23 :
We are only four days into this, and the results have been incredible, historic, really. Only the United States of America could lead this, only us. But when you add the Israeli Defense Forces, a devastatingly capable force, the combination is sheer destruction for our radical Islamist Iranian adversaries. They are toast, and they know it. or at least soon enough, they will know it.
SPEAKER 13 :
Well, General Kane made an important point, Tony, saying that Iran has been firing fewer and fewer missiles as time has gone on. It’s unclear whether they’re losing the will to fight or more likely that they’re just losing the ability to launch as those sites are being taken out by the U.S.
SPEAKER 15 :
We’re going to talk a little bit more about that with Senator Cramer here in just a moment. Quickly, I want to go to primaries. The first of the primaries of this midterm election took place yesterday. Voters in Texas, North Carolina and Arkansas making their voices heard. What’s the update? What are the results telling us?
SPEAKER 13 :
That’s right. The results are in, Tony. And James Tallarico defeated Congresswoman Jasmine Crockett in Texas with about, it was a close race. He won with about 53% of the vote. Now, Tallarico is interesting, calls himself a Presbyterian seminarian, but he recently said that the Bible doesn’t have anything to say about gay marriage or abortion. So maybe he went to the wrong place. seminary. But regardless, on the Republican side, the primary for Senate is headed to a runoff between Senator John Cornyn and Texas AG Ken Paxton. In fact, we have a clip here.
SPEAKER 16 :
We now head into a 12-week primary runoff. But I think everyone in this room, everyone in Texas, and everyone in Washington knows where this is headed. Elections are about choices, and the choice in the Republican… race for the U.S. Senate is crystal clear. So we must stay focused, we must stay united, and we must be ready to send a second conservative senator to Washington.
SPEAKER 13 :
A couple other notes, Tony. Congressman Dan Crenshaw lost his primary, and former governor Roy Cooper, a Democrat, is facing off against Michael Watley for that vacant Senate seat in North Carolina.
SPEAKER 15 :
It’s going to be a very interesting election year. Casey, thanks so much for the update and keeping us apprised of what’s happening. Thanks, Tony. All right. I want to go back to the latest on the U.S. military operation in Iran. As I mentioned just moments ago, the Senate voted down a measure to limit President Trump’s ability to take additional military action against Iran. Joining us now to discuss this and more, Senator Kevin Cramer of North Dakota, who serves on the Senate Armed Services Committee. Senator Cramer, welcome back to Washington Watch. Thanks for joining us. Always a pleasure. Thanks, Tony. Any surprise regarding the vote in the Senate? This is not the first time the Democrats have pushed this.
SPEAKER 05 :
Boy, not only is it not the first time, it’s not the second, third, or fourth time. They just keep doing it. It’s a way that they try to take over the floor of the United States Senate. And frankly, Tim Kaine has made that crystal clear by admitting it, that this is a tactic to try to absorb floor time to prevent us from doing other things. Unfortunately for him, I guess, but fortunately for America, we once again rejected it. And I think we always will. It’s a terrible time to bring up a resolution like this while our troops, here we are, what, four days in? While our troops are in harm’s way, fighting for the freedom of the region, for our country, for our very good friend and ally Israel, obviously. And at a time like this, we would try to put forward a resolution saying that, no, you shouldn’t be doing it. It’s It’s backwards. And frankly, I really appreciated the reporting that you guys are doing, because what Pete Hankseth and General Kane did this morning in their short briefing was spectacular. It was informative. And I think it made every member of the United States Armed Forces feel like they were doing something meaningful. And they are.
SPEAKER 15 :
You know, you and I actually talked about the Venezuelan, what took place in Venezuela. And, you know, there was support for that. I would say this is even a more clear cut case than what took place. I know that what took place in Venezuela was described as more of a law enforcement operation. But this one, to me, seems to be clear cut with the president operating with the authority based upon the information we have. eventually to us.
SPEAKER 05 :
Well, that’s right, Tony. And let’s not forget, there’s a lot of presidents before this one that said they wanted to do something like this. They would do something like this. We can’t allow them to have a nuclear weapon. All the right rhetoric and never the right action. And what I love so much about President Trump’s decision here was that He’s not going to wait for them to fire their first missile at us. He’s going to make sure they never get to fire the first missile at us. And there’s more than a little bit of evidence. There’s abundance of evidence that that’s what they’re aiming to do. They even say as much. Their goal is to wipe out Israel and then wipe out the United States. So, no, this was clearly both in his moral high ground, but also in his legal high ground to do. And that’s why these… I’m not even sure the War Powers, frankly, the War Powers Act is constitutional. That is an open question in and of itself. But we certainly can’t have 535 commanders in chief.
SPEAKER 15 :
Right. Now, under the current structure, as you said, many question the constitutionality of the War Powers Act. But the president has first a 48 hour notification to Congress. He’s done that. Congress has been notified. You’ve been briefed. You were briefed yesterday. Then there’s a 60 day clock. where the president has the authority to operate and he must either obtain congressional authorization or terminate the hostilities, according to the War Powers Act. He’s saying that this could be wrapped up within four to five weeks. So that’s clearly within that 60 day time frame.
SPEAKER 05 :
That’s correct, Tony. And even if he comes up on the 60 days and feels it needs to be extended, he has the option of extending it another 30. So it really ends up being 90 days. And to that point, to your point, Donald Trump, one thing he has demonstrated is when he takes action, he takes it quickly, and he gets out. Venezuela was a great example. That was a one-day situation. Midnight Hammer, which by the way, when you consider what our bombers and what our military were able to do in conducting that obliteration of of Iran’s nuclear capabilities at Midnight Hammer, if that didn’t convince the Ayatollah and the regime that Donald Trump’s serious when he says he’ll do something specific, if you don’t meet his timelines, I don’t know what more they could have asked for evidence. But so, yes, you’re right. I think the timeline is going to work out just fine.
SPEAKER 15 :
Senator, I know you can’t get into the classified elements of the briefing, but was there anything that was presented to you by the administration regarding the trigger triggering U.S. action that was a surprise to you?
SPEAKER 05 :
There was not, Tony, and what I think is interesting that there’s been a little bit of controversy, or at least the creation of controversy over the statement that somehow it was Benjamin Netanyahu or Israel’s commitment to attack that triggered our necessity to join them in that fight as though they were the guiding principle, to which I say, okay, I don’t think that’s true. I definitely don’t believe that’s true, but… I thought the president was totally fine when he said, maybe, maybe my encouragement or maybe some of my words gave the Israelis the confidence to move forward. But, Tony, let’s make no mistake. Israel is important enough. for us to work on this with them together. And if they chose a time to go forward when we were planning to go forward anyway, why wouldn’t we do it with them? The two greatest air forces in the history of the world working together on a noble cause like taking down Iran, I don’t know why we wouldn’t wanna do it with them.
SPEAKER 15 :
Well, the level of preparation and planning that’s required for an operation that we’ve seen in the last four days is hard to imagine that Israel drug us into this. We had to be very well prepared and positioned to do this. It was a cooperative effort. I mean, I think anybody with half a brain would see that. I want to go back to something you said a moment ago. We just get a little about a minute and a half left that the sheer force that the president has been using. And he’s he even this goes back to his first term that he talks about victory, doesn’t talk about containment. This is a major shift in military philosophy for the United States. Going back to to Korea, where we fought wars of containment, not wars to win. This is big. This is a big change.
SPEAKER 05 :
It is a big change, Tony. It sends a very strong message. A lot of people say, well, what are we going to do in these other theaters? We can’t afford to have wars in multiple places. There’s also a geopolitical shift as a result of this change in philosophy in the United States and our projection of power. I think we’ve pretty much proven to everybody that we actually are better than you thought. that our military is still the very, very best and we’re capable and willing to use it for the right causes. And I don’t think Xi Jinping woke up this morning and thought, gee, I think today would be a good day to do something bad. I don’t think that Vladimir Putin thought, gee, the United States, maybe we can try something now that we know they’re weaker. No, they’re all looking going, oh my goodness, this is serious. And I think it’s changed, it’s reshuffled the entire deck.
SPEAKER 15 :
I think you’re absolutely right, Senator. I think the thing that people see that is probably most pronounced is the willingness to use the strength that we had. I think the strength was pretty well understood, but it’s the willingness to use it that I think has sent a strong message.
SPEAKER 05 :
And what Donald Trump has done is we’re no longer just the peacekeeper. We’re now the peacemaker. And I rather like that position.
SPEAKER 15 :
Senator Kramer, always great to see you, my friend. Thanks so much for joining us. All right, folks, stick with us. We’re coming back with more Washington Watch on the other side of the bridge.
SPEAKER 14 :
When in the course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature’s God entitle them.
SPEAKER 22 :
A decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation. We hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal That they’re endowed by their Creator.
SPEAKER 14 :
With certain unalienable rights. That among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men. Deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. Happy 250th. Happy 250th. Happy 250th. Happy 250th birthday, America. May God bless America.
SPEAKER 15 :
You see, America has freedom for a purpose. The question is, are we living by that purpose today? See, the founders understood we as a nation would be accountable to God for what he had granted to us. They sought freedom for a purpose, and that freedom was given to us as a nation for that same purpose, to serve God, to honor him, and to live as a people under his authority.
SPEAKER 28 :
At the 2026 National Gathering for Prayer and Repentance in Washington, D.C., members of Congress, state leaders, evangelical leaders, and intercessors from across the nation united as one voice in prayer.
SPEAKER 06 :
Heavenly Father, thank you so much for this gathering. We do repent. And we ask for your continued favor and blessing over our nation, even when we don’t deserve it.
SPEAKER 12 :
I thank you that because of the shed blood and the glorious righteousness of your son, Jesus Christ, a sinner such as myself can boldly approach your throne. You said that you helped the humble, and we’re asking just now that you would help us, Lord.
SPEAKER 07 :
While our God is marching on. Glory, glory, glory.
SPEAKER 03 :
We pray that you humble us, help us to follow after you with all our hearts so that we can see righteousness exalted in this nation and this nation restored to you. We know that it’s not by our power, it’s not by our might, it’s by your spirit.
SPEAKER 15 :
Freedom has a name. His name is Jesus. And freedom has a purpose. It is to honor and glorify you. We pray that we would return to that purpose. Amen. Welcome back to Washington Watch. Let me remind you regarding the prayer initiative for the situation in the Middle East. Hundreds of you have signed the pledge to pray and we’ve sent you the prayer points and you can join us and I encourage you to do so. We need to be praying for our leaders, praying for our men and women in the military, praying for the people of Iran, the innocent people there, praying for our friends in Israel. Praying for these spiritual strongholds to come down there in the Middle East. So text the word Iran to 67742. Iran to 67742. I’ll send you a link. Get your prayer points. You can sign that pledge. All right. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration, the FDA, has received notable criticism over its inconsistency in its regulatory decisions. Now, most recently, the FDA rejected several new drugs for rare diseases. leading some to accuse the agency of inconsistent standards and unrealistic regulatory requirements. And, you know, we’ve talked about this many times on the program, the FDA’s position and actions on the abortion drug, Mifeprestone, actually approving new generic drugs, even when it’s at odds with the danger that the data reveals. So is reform needed at the FDA? Joining us now is Senator John Husted of Ohio, who serves on the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. Senator, welcome back to Washington Watch. Thanks for joining us.
SPEAKER 10 :
Great. Thanks for inviting me on. Great to be with you.
SPEAKER 15 :
All right. Before we jump into the topic, I just want to congratulate you. We were together last month where you received the 100 percent award from FRC Action. So I want to thank you for your pro-family votes there in the United States Senate.
SPEAKER 10 :
Well, thank you. I was honored to receive the award. Before I got the award, I didn’t know I had 100% record on it, but I’m not surprised because supporting Ohio families has just been something that I’ve loved to do my whole life, and my faith certainly guides me there.
SPEAKER 15 :
So let’s talk about the FDA. You recently joined with Senator Mullen of Oklahoma in writing to FDA Commissioner Dr. Marty McCary to urge the agency to continue accelerating access to lifesaving therapies for these rare disease that patients have. So what’s going on here? Why does it appear that the FDA is dragging its feet on some of these lifesaving drugs?
SPEAKER 10 :
You know, it’s a really good question, but I came at this from two different directions. First of all, I heard from the families, the families of individuals who have rare diseases, that they were concerned that the posture of the FDA was to try to discourage research and granting those companies that were coming up with therapies, denying them the ability to have their therapies approved. And then I also heard from the companies, the companies that are doing some research in this area. So when you have both the business side of it that show concern over the way, the posture of the FDA, and then you have it from the patient community, that’s something that really strikes me as something that we need to start asking questions about. And, you know, the FDA has been working Just put it that way in terms of responding to what both the companies and the patients are asking for.
SPEAKER 15 :
So, Senator Houston, how do you explain the FDA being slow to approve life-saving drugs, but so quick to approve drugs that take life, like the generic forms of mifeprestone?
SPEAKER 10 :
Yeah, these are troubling circumstances. On the first part, I really have a hard time trying to understand why they don’t want to help, why they’re so reluctant to support the efforts to help with rare diseases. I think that what you hear sometimes are, people who will defend the FDA in this space, they will say, well, the companies are providing false hope. The trials don’t really show great progress. They only show limited impact. I think they’re sometimes saying it’s too expensive for so little of an impact. But imagine you’re one of the family members of the 30 million people who have a rare disease. I don’t think you’re really thinking about money, you’re thinking about, hey, if this company wants to do a therapy, why shouldn’t I have access to it? And then you hit the big point, but they’ve been slow to look at drugs like mifepristone, which we know… particularly if not prescribed with a doctor’s supervision, can lead to catastrophic outcomes in terms of to the woman who… I mean, I’ve heard horror stories about people with ectopic pregnancies who had challenges. I’ve heard the stories of… women who get access to the drug but were later along in their pregnancy didn’t know it and it didn’t work and it caused harm to the baby. So, I don’t know why they’ve been a little slow to say, hey, we should improve access in those particular cases to a woman to have access to the doctor and make sure we have all the information before a woman has access to mifepristone.
SPEAKER 15 :
Yeah, it just seems upside down to me, slow to help people with drugs that might save their life if they want access to them. But here they’re allowing men to order in the mail abortion drugs that they can give surreptitiously to the mothers of their children. It’s inexplicable. Yeah.
SPEAKER 10 :
And I’ll just say I care a lot about the issue. I started out life in foster care. My birth mother was encouraged not to have that baby, which was me, and got adopted and led a great life. So I just care so much about the issue. And when you hear about men who get access to the mifepristone drug, try to put it in drinks or food of a woman that they may have fathered a child with and they don’t want her to have that baby and are doing things like that, that is just very troubling. Another reason that I think it’s important that a woman have access to a doctor who have a visit with that doctor before the drug is prescribed. Because you just don’t want it out there where anybody can have access to it and do some really harmful things.
SPEAKER 15 :
And that’s what’s happening right now. Senator Husted, I want to thank you for joining us. Always great to see you, my friend. Thanks for joining us. Great to be with you. And, folks, this is something else you can weigh in on as well. We’ve got friends on the Hill that are fighting this. This is the FDA. This is the, believe it or not, the Trump administration. We’ve got to encourage them to make the right decision. We need to pray for them, but we need to push them. So text the word LIFE to 67742, LIFE to 67742, and sign the petition. All right, we’re coming back with more Washington Watch on the other side of this break, so don’t go anywhere.
SPEAKER 25 :
I think all people really need to have this type of education.
SPEAKER 19 :
Well, I can tell you that it’s been an amazing course, period. I think this course is a reminder that a biblical worldview should really impact everything. It impacts our government from the federal to the state to the local. It should impact what we’re doing with our families and with our work.
SPEAKER 20 :
God and Government is a video-driven, Bible-based training course from Family Research Council that explores the connection between biblical principles and American government. In this six-session video series, FRC President Tony Perkins equips participants with a practical understanding of civil government from a biblical worldview.
SPEAKER 25 :
I would encourage all people to take it. I almost wish I would have took it earlier that I could have taught my kids this. I wish I had known these things when we were homeschooling because I think children and my adults now would just greatly be influenced by that information.
SPEAKER 27 :
So I’m an attorney, and for me, it gives me some direct practical knowledge of what I can do to try to impact my legal community to make better legislation, to try to encourage legislators to make choices that have a biblical worldview, which is what we really want.
SPEAKER 01 :
Any pastor would benefit from taking this course. because we are dual citizens, right? We are citizens of the kingdom of God, but we’re also citizens of this great land, and that comes with responsibility.
SPEAKER 19 :
Even as someone who has been involved in these types of issues for a while, you’re learning little bits and pieces of new stuff all the time. But it’s also approachable enough that newer people, younger people, high school, college students, they can really glean something from this. So I would encourage everybody to take this course, whether it’s the videos, whether it’s doing it in person, bring your Bible study group through it, bring your homeschool group through it, and equip yourself for these challenging days ahead.
SPEAKER 20 :
View the course at frc.org slash God and government or on the Stand Firm app.
SPEAKER 15 :
All right, welcome back to Washington Watch. Thanks for tuning in. Check out the website, TonyPerkins.com. Lots of resources there for you. Also, if you’ve not yet downloaded the Stand Firm app, there’s even more on the app. Not only will you have access to Washington Watch and all of the resources there, but But you’ll have access to our news and commentary from a biblical perspective, The Washington Stand, and my daily devotional, Stand on the Word. So go to the App Store and make your smartphone smarter. Get the Stand Firm app. Well, earlier today, the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom released its annual report on the state of religious freedom across the globe. Now, this is a congressionally authorized entity. It has nine members. I served on it for… four years served as both vice chair and chair during the first trump administration and they it’s a mixture bipartisan and they look at some of the the hot spots around the world based upon where there is persecution for religious minorities including christians and they come up with recommendations to the congress to the state department and to the white house on recognizing certain countries as what they call countries of particular concern. So joining us now to discuss the findings of this year’s report is former Congresswoman Vicki Hartzler. She was also the chairman of the Values Action Team in the House, and she now serves as chair of the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom. And she has long been an advocate for those persecuted for their faith. Congresswoman Vicki Hartzler, Chairwoman Vicki Hartzler, Welcome to Washington Watch. Good to see you again.
SPEAKER 02 :
Good to see you, Tony.
SPEAKER 15 :
All right. So give us an overview of the report’s findings. Any new surprises?
SPEAKER 02 :
Well, we certainly have plenty to talk about. Sadly, there is a lot of persecution around the world, and people are being denied their basic ability to live out their lives according to their deeply held beliefs. But we have 18 countries that we have recommended for countries of particular concern. Those are the worst violators. And we have added two countries to that list today, and that includes Syria and Libya. Those are new, besides the China and Iran and Nigeria and many of the others. And then we have 11 countries that we have recommended for special watch lists. They don’t quite meet all of the criteria, but they certainly need to change their ways and enable their citizens to be able to live freely. And our government needs to intervene in these entities. And then we have certain entities of particular concern, which aren’t countries, but they’re like al-Shabaab and different Islamic State entities that we also highlight in our report. And so it’s certainly heartbreaking to look at all of the persecution around the world, but it’s also an opportunity for the United States to shine the light and to help speak up for those who can’t speak up for themselves. That’s the purpose of the International Religious Freedom Act. It makes us unique. It elevates religious freedom equal with economic security and military security in our foreign policy. And so as our government leaders, whether it be the president or secretary of state or our members of Congress, talk with the leaders of these other countries and perhaps negotiate trade deals or negotiate military assistance. These topics of religious freedom should be brought up in that discussion. And, as a result, we have seen some people released from prison, and we have seen some countries change their laws to make them more supportive of religious freedom. And that’s our ultimate goal.
SPEAKER 15 :
Well, and the record is quite clear that if a country recognizes that first freedom that we have here in America, it’s a human right, religious freedom, that there’s a greater chance that they’re going to have economic opportunity, social stability. So it’s in the interest of the United States to promote freedom. religious freedom abroad. I want to go back to one of the countries you mentioned that you added to the list this year because just recently the Congress removed some of the sanctions against the country of Syria, which has had a change of regimes, but it doesn’t look like the threat to religious minorities has really changed.
SPEAKER 02 :
No, as we talk to a lot of these religious groups and watch what has happened, it’s been disappointing how the new transitional government has not protected these religious minorities. And we’ve seen massacres of the Alawis and Druze, and there was a suicide bomber that killed hundreds of Christians in an apostolic Greek Orthodox church earlier this year. And while the government may not be directly doing it, we did hear reports that some of the perpetrators were aligned with the government, but there has not been accountability. And you get on the CPC list, from our perspective, if either the government is directly doing these atrocities, such as in China, or if they’re complicit and they’re ignoring or not following up on it. And that’s what we’re seeing in Syria. There hasn’t been prosecutions for these people, and it hasn’t stopped, and there hasn’t been steps taken to help protect these people. religious minorities. And, in fact, they have been kicked out of government positions that they had before. And they’re being denied businesses. And it’s kind of a slow strangulation of these individuals, encouraging them, we believe, actually to leave the country. And so there’s a lot of issues there that the new president, al-Sharara, has on his plate he needs to address soon from our perspective.
SPEAKER 15 :
That’s very similar to the situation in Nigeria where it’s not the government that’s doing it, but it’s not trying to stop it. We just have about 30 seconds left. Turkey. Talk very quickly about where Turkey falls.
SPEAKER 02 :
Well, they’re in the special watch list category. They’re kicking out American missionaries and pastors there. And they’re squelching faith. There is no seminaries other than the Sunni Muslim religion. And it’s very much controlled by the government, what you can preach, what you can do. And so it’s very oppressive. It needs to change.
SPEAKER 15 :
Congresswoman Vicki Hartzler, chair now of the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, thanks so much for joining us.
SPEAKER 02 :
Thank you, Tony.
SPEAKER 15 :
All right, coming up, as Congress debates the constitutional authority for President Trump’s actions in Iran, we also need to consider the moral dimensions of the decision. That’s what we talk about next. Don’t go away. We have state leaders that want to keep the deadly drugs out of their states. Maybe if these abortion pills were coming by boat, the administration would change its tactics. It’s time to respect the rights of the states, and it’s time to end death by mail.
SPEAKER 26 :
Family Research Council President Tony Perkins, alongside Senator Lindsey Graham, led a press conference on Capitol Hill, urging the Trump administration to end the Biden-era policies that have allowed dangerous abortion drugs to be shipped across state lines. They were joined by state attorneys general, pro-life advocates and multiple Republican congressmen.
SPEAKER 17 :
There are more abortions today in the United States than when Roe versus Wade was the law of the land. And why is that? It’s because of the chemical abortion drug, Mifeprestone. Nearly 70% of the abortions that are committed in the United States today are committed because of Mifeprestone.
SPEAKER 08 :
The federal government is allowing a chemical abortion pill to be sent through the mail that wipes out every state unborn protection law in the land.
SPEAKER 23 :
It’s harder to ship alcohol in this country than it is to ship the abortion pill.
SPEAKER 18 :
And that should never be the case. This is a drug that takes the life of every child. So there is always a death that’s involved in this drug, but is also incredibly dangerous for the mom as well. We think that we should require a doctor to be able to get access to this drug.
SPEAKER 09 :
As a doctor, I think it’s essential that there be human contact before the pill is prescribed.
SPEAKER 24 :
It’s not about a national abortion ban. It’s about validating Dobbs and preventing other states from nullifying the legislative policy choices that have been made by our states and facilitating the illegal, unethical, and dangerous drug trafficking of abortion pills into our states without any medical oversight whatsoever.
SPEAKER 08 :
We can simply fix this if we have the courage to do it. So what are all of us telling the administration? You’ve been a great pro-life president, Mr. President. It’s now time to deal with this issue.
SPEAKER 17 :
We want to protect life, and we want to give voice to the American people and their right to protect life state by state, city by city, and yes, here in the United States Congress. That’s what this fight is about.
SPEAKER 26 :
Let your voice be heard. Text LIFE to 67742. Sign the petition. Tell the Trump administration to act.
SPEAKER 11 :
The Stand Firm app brings trusted Family Research Council resources together in one place. Stay informed with news articles from the Washington Stand, watch interviews from Washington Watch, explore courses produced by FRC, and find many other resources to equip you to engage culture and government from a biblical perspective. Download the Stand Firm app today by texting APP to 67742 or by searching for Stand Firm in your app store.
SPEAKER 15 :
This is Washington Watch. I’m Tony Perkins. Thanks for tuning in and being a part of the program. Again, let me encourage you to text the word Iran to 67742 and join the prayer effort, praying for our leaders, that they would make wise decisions, praying for our military men and women, that the Lord would keep them safe, praying for our friends in Israel, praying for the innocent people in Iran. praying for these strongholds to come down. We’ve got prayer points for you. And so take the pledge. Text Iran to 67742. Iran to 67742. Our word for today comes from Leviticus chapter 15. Thus you shall separate the children of Israel from their uncleanness, lest they die in their uncleanness when they defile my tabernacle that is among them. Now, it is unlikely that you’ve heard many sermons on this chapter, which focuses on bodily discharges that led people to being separated from God because of his holiness. Now, this understanding of God’s holiness is often lost in our focus today on grace, but this is the reason for the grace we enjoy, God’s holiness. God is holy, and he has called us to be holy. God’s call to holiness is a call to belong wholly to him, to reflect his character, and to live distinct from patterns of the corruption of the fallen nature of man that distorts his design. But this is not something we can do by our own will or determination. To be sure, we must be intentional and disciplined, but the power of the Holy Spirit is required. As Paul wrote to the Ephesians about how they were to live the Christian life in the midst of a pagan world, he said in Ephesians 6, Finally, my brethren, be strong in the Lord and in the power of his might. That is the only way we can do it. To find out more about our journey through the Bible, text BIBLE to 67742. That’s BIBLE to 67742. Despite the clear threat that the radical Iranian regime posed to the United States, Israel, and to the broader Middle East, some Democrats continue to criticize President Trump for launching Operation Epic Fury against the Islamic Republic. And they claim there’s no justification for his decision to act, even amid Iran’s rapid buildup of ballistic missiles and aggressive pursuit of nuclear ambitions.
SPEAKER 29 :
The president has a responsibility to make the case to the American people as to the justification for this war, but has provided no evidence that there was an imminent threat to the American people here or abroad.
SPEAKER 15 :
That was a minority leader, Hakeem Jeffries, in the House. I think the president has been making that case, and so has his cabinet. But beyond the political and the legal, the constitutional arguments surrounding U.S. military actions in Iran, Is there moral justification for the administration’s actions? Does the Bible provide guidance for this? Joining me now to discuss this, Dr. Mark Levecky. He is the MacDonald Distinguished Scholar of Ethics, War, and Public Life at Providence Magazine, a publication of the Institute of the Religion and Democracy. He is also a non-resident research fellow at the U.S. Naval War College and an adjunct professor of ethics at the U.S. Naval Academy. and moral injury. Dr. Levecky, welcome back to Washington Watch. Thanks for joining me today.
SPEAKER 04 :
It’s very good to be back. Thanks for having me.
SPEAKER 15 :
So it’s very natural for people to think that war is bad and peace is good. I agree with that. And I think that would be a biblical view of things. But there is a time when war is upon us and it’s necessary. There is justification. And this is something that Christian thinkers have wrestled with for centuries, millennia. It’s something that we have looked at over and over. There is justification for war. Let’s talk about that.
SPEAKER 04 :
Yeah, absolutely. C.S. Lewis said it well, if there’s a justification for war, if wars can be just, then peace is sometimes unjust. And I think we’re facing one of those scenarios today. Look, all great civilizations, and even most minor ones, and all great religious traditions have wrestled with two basic questions. When is it right to fight? And how do you fight these fights that are right to fight? And in the West, the moral framework that has guided Western morality from time out of mind is the just war tradition. And it draws on classical, that’s to say, Greco-Roman moral philosophy and the Hebrew and Hebrew scriptures, Christian scriptures and Hebraic tradition. to articulate two broad categories of helping us to identify when is it right to fight, how do you rightly fight the fight that’s right to fight. Importantly, just where tradition is grounded, its moral logic is in the purpose of being a human being. That’s to say it is interested in human flourishing. And to understand what the human purpose is, we can go all the way back to Genesis. Human beings were made in the image of God. What’s that mean? Well, you find in the clause that immediately follows a clue as to part of what it means. And it means to exercise dominion, right? And that’s not domination. It sounds like that. It’s not. dominion rather is something like stewardship or providential care over creation that’s a human mandate you see that echoed all the way up into romans 13 and and the reasons for human government the problem with all of this of course is that right after we were made in the image of god We fell on our faces. And so now the exercise of dominion has to take into account the fact of the fall. And so now in a world that is morally conflicted, we have to figure out how to address moral conflict without giving up on ethics. And the just war tradition allows us to do that.
SPEAKER 15 :
Well, speaking of the just war theory, I mean, the three basic principles that, you know, we get this from Augustine and Thomas Aquinas really unpacked it. But legitimate authority, that means it’s a state actor. And that’s what we have here in this case. Just cause and right intention. And that right intention often speaks is this to exploit the people that you’re going after, the country you’re going after, you’re going after. You know, minerals. Are you going after resources? And I would say I think that there’s been some questionable conflicts that we’ve had in the past in our country in terms of intentionality. I would say this for me personally, as I look at this through the lens of the just war theory and of scripture, I think what the president has done in this case is pretty clear cut.
SPEAKER 04 :
Yeah, I agree. I mean, let’s go through those criteria. So those three criteria that you’ve rightly listed are part of the what’s called usad bellum, just justice toward war. This is the part of that tradition that tells us when it is right to fight. And as you’ve noted, Thomas Aquinas said there are three things that are essential for a fight to be right. You have to have a proper authority. And so now, as you signaled earlier in the show, there’s some question maybe about the constitutionality of various elements of this. But look, as commander in chief and under the War Powers Act, Trump has a great deal, any U.S. president has a great deal of both privilege and responsibility. They can and must, as a part of their responsibility, care about vital U.S. national interests, and they can launch particular kinds of deployments of force. And then there are stipulations to kind of constrain them. They have to notify Congress within 48 hours that was done. They have 60 days to conclude the use of force unless they get a congressional extension. That presumably will be done. But also, so that’s, you know, that’s that’s the the right authority the president trying to exercise the responsibilities of of dominion and then you move into just cause and here as you’ve already noted the the cause is pretty plain like we can recite the history um and president trump did this starting from 1979 forward History makes the case. You have the Iran hostage crisis, the Beirut bombings, the U.S. embassy bombings that coincided with that, the Khobar Towers, the Iraqi insurgency. Hundreds, upwards of a thousand of Americans have been killed by the Iranian regime since 1979. That’s a part of the cause for all of this.
SPEAKER 15 :
And we can also take their own words, that they want to kill us.
SPEAKER 04 :
Oh, they want to kill us and they want to kill our major non-NATO treaty ally, Israel. And the interests of Israel are vital national interests to the United States as well. Not every single one of them. But, you know, Israel is a major national interest for the United States, right? They are a security producer in the Middle East. They help us with containment. They provide endless intelligence for us to help stabilize and maintain our own interests in the Middle East. So when Israel is under assault, and they have been You know, the Iranian regime has pledged to drive them into the ocean and has demonstrated every intent to do that. We have to take them at their word and come to Israel’s aid. So that’s certainly the cause. And then you touched on right intent, and the right intent is there. President Trump spelled it out. He talked about dismantling, destroying Iranian nuclear ambitions. That’s important. He talked about getting rid of the ballistic missiles, which are a threat both to the United States, but especially to Israel and to their drone program. He mentioned destroying their navy, crippling their ships and their submarine fleets, which are a direct threat to international shipping and have been. And then also, and very importantly, getting rid of their proxy terror network. And the Iranian regime has bolstered terror networks from Lebanon to the Palestinian territories, to Yemen, to Iraq. and the various insurgency groups that are there, Syria, Bahrain. They provide endless financial support for them, materiel, weapons, military training, and the like. And his intent is to make sure that Iran can no longer be a threat to anything outside its borders. And then, you know, there’s some fungibility as to the regime change question, which I think is certainly Israel’s interest. And Donald Trump hasn’t signaled that as one of our own, but he is, of course, open to the Iranian people doing what they can to seize power. and then you know to varying degrees we can support that um that’s a heavy lift acknowledged but uh another part of just war tradition which is is important maybe to note is the set of prudential criteria that follow these three stipulations that we’ve just listed and these prudential guidelines aren’t necessary but they do provide guidance and these are things like probability of success last resort and a proportionality of ends and with this limited though ambitious intention of dismantling the nukes and the ballistic missile program and to guarantee free shipping and to eliminate the proxy support, that’s doable, right? We can do that largely with air power. So I think the case can be…
SPEAKER 15 :
And one of those is it’s a last resort. And I think the president actually demonstrated that by pursuing diplomatic means to resolve this issue, even to the frustration of some. I think he went – I think he proved that point. Now, Dr. Levesque, I want to take this down and break this down a little bit more because there might be some that would say, well, you know, you’ve got the Ten Commandments. It says we should not kill. And – I will tell you, I wrestled with this as a young Marine in boot camp. I had to wrestle through this. Unfortunately, I didn’t have a professor teaching me about just war theory. I had to kind of come up with it on my own. But this goes back to legitimate authority. You’re not acting on your own. And so address that for those who would say, well, you know, we shouldn’t be involved in these type of things. We’re not to kill people.
SPEAKER 04 :
Yeah, sure. So an immediate qualification is in order. I think the biblical position is pretty clear that the mandate is not do not kill, but the mandate is do not murder. And this follows hard on common sense and common law in which we recognize there are different types of kills. So killing comes in different species. Homicide comes in different species. Some of it you should never do. Murder. Don’t do it. Period. Full stop. No equivocations. But other kinds of kills are, let’s say, morally neutral. So accidental killing in war, noncombatants. We could say that in various instances you should have been more careful. So there’s varying degrees of culpability, but it’s basically morally neutral. And then there is another kind of kill because the innocent need to be protected. Injustices need to be requited and the evil needs to be punished. that there’s a kind of kill that just where guidance helps us to understand is morally permitted. And maybe because of the responsibilities of political authorities, et cetera, maybe even politically or morally obligatory. So, you know, the biblical stance is quite a bit more complicated than simply do not kill. From Genesis forward, we see that God will require a reckoning for the taking of human blood. This isn’t simply because the victims are made in the image of God, but also because those who stand in behalf of the victims being made in the image of God have to demand an accounting for that blood. So it’s a part of the dominion mandate to do what is sometimes necessary to protect the innocent.
SPEAKER 15 :
Well, in Romans chapter 13, it makes very clear that the government has the sword. And a sword is not there to trim your toenails. That is there for the execution of wrath, for defense, and for punishment.
SPEAKER 04 :
No, that’s right. On the surface, as you’ve said, war is an ugly thing. And so I think we sometimes get hung up because we see something that is so seemingly morally abhorrent, so visually unappealing, so tragic in so many different ways. And make no mistake, war is basically about breaking things and killing things, killing people in your enemy’s territory until they are exhausted and have lost the will or the capacity to fight. That’s terrible. And you would never do that unless the innocent are being so sufficiently threatened, evil is running rampant in sufficiently grotesque ways, and injustices are being permitted that need to be overruled. So the question isn’t so much, sometimes I’m challenged, like how can you as a Christian ethicist advocate killing someone made in the image of God? But the real question is what am I supposed to do as a Christian and as an ethicist when one image of God is kicking apart the face of another image of God without justification and they won’t stop? Mercy always costs somebody something. The cross teaches us this. Mercy shown to the assailant means that the victim will pay the price of mercy. That’s unjust. That’s unloving.
SPEAKER 15 :
You are acting on behalf of another. I mean, as a former police officer, as a Marine, I had to work through those issues. And we need to have a clear understanding of that in the church because we need men and women of faith filling those positions in our military and in our nation’s law enforcement. We don’t want them to be conflicted about the moral aspects of their job.
SPEAKER 04 :
Well, we don’t. And that confliction comes with a cost. So there is an increasing understanding of what is now being called moral injury. And it’s a kind of psychic trauma that comes from doing or allowing to be done something that goes against a deeply held moral norm. And too many American Christians believe that killing is wrong, period, but in war it is necessary. And it makes the very business of warfighting morally injurious. And this is a crisis because moral injury is one of the number one predictors for combat veteran suicide. So we need to send our warfighters into harm’s way with a better understanding that killing in combat is not necessarily in dereliction of the law of love. It’s a manifestation of it in certain circumstances.
SPEAKER 15 :
Dr. Lavecki, we’ve got to leave it there. Always great to talk with you. Thanks so much for joining us. And folks, I want to thank you for joining us as well. And again, I want to encourage you to pray. Join the prayer effort. Text IRAN to 67742. Until next time, keep standing.
SPEAKER 07 :
Washington Watch with Tony Perkins is brought to you by Family Research Council. To support our efforts to advance faith, family, and freedom, please text GIVE to 67742. That’s GIVE to 67742. Portions of the show discussing candidates are brought to you by Family Research Council Action. For more information, please visit TonyPerkins.com.
