Conversations with Grace: Diversity in Media

By

On October 2, 2026

In Race and Diversity

Diversity representation in the media is a hot topic right now. When movies, shows, or books intentionally introduce people of color (POC), is it respectful and necessary? Dangerously rewriting history? In line with a biblical perspective? I sat down with my Black 20-year-old daughter Grace to discuss this. Grace is currently a junior-year history major at Biola University. 

Mom: When do you first remember being impacted by racial diversity in media? 

Grace: The 2014 version of Annie. [Grace was about 8 years old.] I grew up watching the other one; I loved it, and that was all I knew. So when they came out with the new version, it helped me to know that there was another way this story could go. There are children of all colors in foster care and orphanages all over the world. I thought, “Hey, I’m not alone in this, and it’s not just children from Africa or China who are orphans.”  

It was also significant that William Stacks (like Daddy Warbucks) showed a person of color who was affluent and successful and that was cool too. I realized I loved seeing movies with people who looked like me, and not just as a background character. 

Mom: What do you mean by “background character?”

Grace: There’s a joke among Disney fans [of the popular “tween” sitcoms] where there’s always a “token Black friend” (or person of color) who is funny, has snappy remarks, and can either dance or sing. Like “Willow” in Liv and Maddie. 

Zendaya was on “Shake It Up,” but left because there wasn’t adequate representation of people of color; then Disney came up with “Casey Undercover,” which has all POC as main characters. The best friend is white. Now there are shows with kids of all different sizes and colors on the Disney Channel. 

Mom: Why is this significant?

Grace: Media affects so much of people’s worldview and how they look at the world and other people. And even history. For people who look like me to be represented but then also portrayed as protagonists and as people who matter, that communicates that we are valuable. That our contributions to the world are worth caring about. 

Me: What does it subtly communicate when there aren’t any POC characters? Like Hannah Montana? 

Grace: It communicates that there can be a “perfect world” without anyone like me in it. Like, we’re not needed. Like, we exist, but there’s no need to make mention of it. 

Read More

What If AI Devastates the World?

By

On September 14, 2026

In Fear

What if AI devastates the world?

I don’t know about you, but I find it rather disconcerting that all these AI engineers keep quitting their jobs because they don’t want to take responsibility for the devastation of the world as we know it.

Here I was, just worried about how AI will prevent a generation from critical thinking, or eliminate lots of jobs, or delude people into fake relationships, when I guess I should have been more concerned about total annihilation. 

Part of me scoffs, rolls my eyes, and remembers Y2K, which resulted in a whole lot of nothing (it was kind of a letdown, actually), but another part feels my heart beat faster and wonders, “what if?” 

I mean, we are so incredibly dependent on machines and invisible servers and clouds for almost every aspect of life that it doesn’t seem inconceivable that an enemy government or a rogue AI agent will figure out how to hack its way into the systems that run our society–electricity, communication, defense, food production, health care–and all hell, quite literally, could break loose. 

Read More

What I would tell Allie Beth Stuckey about her response to Matt’s post on immigration

By

On August 24, 2026

In Poverty, Race and Diversity

When I read Allie Beth’s response to Matt Walsh, I immediately thought of a Christian family in my city who, for twenty years, did exactly what Allie says is stupid and evil: They invited every homeless person in Redlands into their home. Every Sunday, their home was open for church (I had the privilege of visiting three times). These unhomed folks took showers in their bathroom and washed clothes in their machines and sometimes slept in their beds. They showed up every day of the year and at any time during the day or night. This couple wasn’t unwise–he is a retired police officer and their children were grown when this ministry started. 

But instead of looking stupid or evil, they actually look a lot like Jesus. (More coming about them in my book.) After all, it was Jesus who said,

 “For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me’ (Matthew 25:35).”

So I’m not sure Allie Beth’s comparison works. 

Is compassion dangerous? Yes, actually, it can be. Should every Christian family with small children take in “all the homeless people in the city?” Of course not. But one family can make a difference in the life of one single mom. One foster kid. One ex-convict. One refugee. One addict. And corporately, as the global (or even American) Church, we can feed all the hungry and house the homeless and minister to the convicts. 

We must be wise, but we also must take risks for the kingdom of God. That’s what it means to pick up our cross and follow him. 

I think Allie’s point, however, is more about the government’s role, since the government makes decisions about immigration. The government, indeed, must think about safety first and not be swayed by compassion. The safety of its citizens is the government’s highest priority. 

So I agree that the government needs to robustly vet immigrants, and even carefully limit the number of immigrants that join our society. I completely understand that the United States cannot invite in every needy person, and I don’t expect it to. 

But why does that translate into a “blanket ban” against “third-world” immigration? And why is compassion the only reason we would invite in immigrants from developing countries? As I’ve already argued, what if it’s actually in the United States’s best interest to do so? 

As American Christians, we’ve got to be really careful not to confuse the government’s role (safety) and the Christian’s role (compassion). This is complicated because, in some respects, we are the government. So when we’re voting or calling senators about immigration, we may need to put compassion aside and think about safety. Americans might disagree on what that should look like, and that’s okay. 

But as Christians, compassion is non-negotiable. After voting, we’ve got to set aside our “government hat” and personally welcome and love our neighbors–whether immigrants, homeless people, or whoever God calls us to. That is our highest priority. Even when it’s costly. Even when it’s dangerous. 

As an American, I want to welcome immigrants to my country, including the poorest of the poor. With the right vetting, structure, and support, they are what will help our country continue to be prosperous, innovative, and free. And as a Christian, I want to show compassion wisely and sacrificially to whoever God brings into my path. 

What I would tell Matt Walsh about a blanket ban on “third-world” immigration

By

On August 24, 2026

In Race and Diversity

I don’t know it, actually. 

Here’s my argument against a blanket ban on all “third-world” immigration. 

If I ever had the ear of Matt Walsh, I would encourage him to spend a year or two (definitely more than a few weeks) in my beloved Tanzania, one of those “third-world” countries affected by a blanket ban. I would arrange for him to stay with my friend Lucy, who would, no doubt, happily welcome a complete stranger in her home. 

He would get to stay in a concrete block house with one outdoor spigot, an outdoor (spotlessly clean) outhouse and bucket shower, and only the electricity provided by a couple of solar panels. He would experience the inconvenience of living in a house that floods at least twice a year, the tedium of traveling as a sweaty sardine in a bus that takes an hour to travel ten miles, and perhaps feel the desperation of trying to find reliable wages in a city where education and employment are not guaranteed.

But he would also laugh till his sides hurt at Lucy’s sense of humor. He would taste her astonishingly good cooking, despite having access only to a charcoal stove. He would see how hard she works, how physically strong she is, and how smart she is, despite her lack of education and opportunity. He might be tempted to think, “I would love for this woman to be my neighbor. I would love to get a front-row seat to see what she could do with the American Dream. She would make America a better place.” 

Read More

From a New York Dairy Farm to Malawi

By

On July 15, 2026

In Thoughts on Missions

Chuck and Diane Phippen gave up an idyllic American life to serve God on the mission field.

Christians make sacrifices. But most don’t leave behind 10 children, 16 grandchildren (with another on the way), 65 cows and a 250-acre dairy farm to become missionaries in Malawi.  

But that’s just what Chuck and Diane Phippen did in 2023. 

Before that, some might say the Phippens lived an idyllic life on an organic, grass-fed dairy farm; they homeschooled their 12 kids and were deeply embedded in their community and church. Two of their kids had even married two of their pastor’s kids.  

So why do it? Instead of slowing down, why did Chuck, Diane and their two youngest kids pack their belongings into 12 suitcases and leave behind a comfortable, rewarding life that they all loved? Why board a plane on a beautiful spring day in New York and enter a rainy, muggy city in one of the poorest countries in the world?  

Read the story here at the EFCA blog.

The Phippen family

Page 1 of 236

Next

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén

Verified by MonsterInsights