Analysis
Investigative
Virginia NICU nurse sentenced for injuring nine preemies
Isabella Doer
·Spotlight Articles
When faith, family, and motherhood are recast as 'extremism'
If you were asked to picture a domestic threat, you would likely imagine something overtly violent, radical, or destabilizing. What you would not expect is that the description might extend to ordinary Americans raising families, practicing their faith, or embracing traditional views of motherhood.
And yet, that is the concern now entering public debate, prompted in part by the reemergence of a little-known intelligence report from a handful of years ago.
In February, the CIA retracted a number of intelligence reports, and among them was a 2021 assessment that presented women who amplify the narrative of "traditional motherhood" as a possible "extremist" threat to national security.
In 2023, an FBI memorandum presenting "radical-traditionalist" Catholics as a domestic terrorist threat was leaked, and backlash ensued.
The traditional family is viewed as an obstacle to certain ideologies' vision for society — like Marxism. This view of the family as "extremist" is concerning and part of a larger pattern.
Motherhood and family life are among the most basic and enduring features of human society—realities that precede politics and outlast it.
In February 2026, the CIA formally retracted a number of intelligence reports after an independent review found they had failed to meet analytic standards.
Among the reports identified was an October 2021 intelligence assessment on women and extremist movements produced by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). The report was titled, "Women Advancing White Racially and Ethnically Motivated Violent Extremist (REMVE) Radicalization and Recruitment.”
According to findings from the President’s Intelligence Advisory Board, this and other affected reports “did not meet CIA and IC analytic tradecraft standards and failed to be independent of political consideration.”
And there is good reason why.
The report explicitly turned a spotlight of suspicion on individuals who “may not openly advocate violence” but who “amplify” certain narratives, like the idea of "traditional motherhood.".
When motherhood or family life appear within the same analytical categories as extremism — even as part of a study on messaging — this is concerning.
The 2021 report focused on how certain women allegedly engage with extremist movements through direct participation and by shaping and reinforcing the narratives those movements depend upon.
The report itself was narrowly scoped, but the concern among critics centered on how its categories were defined.
It described individuals who, while not necessarily involved in violence, might still contribute to the spread of certain "extremist" ideas. One of those "extremist" ideas to watch, the report noted, is when a group “has lauded motherhood and homemaking as women’s most important responsibility.”
The assessment went further, concluding that “female members have been emerging as key players” in advancing these movements by promoting what it describes as “the white REMVE view of traditional motherhood” and contributing to propaganda and recruitment efforts.
The CIA assessment is not the only example cited in this broader debate.
A 2023 FBI Richmond field office memorandum examining “radical-traditionalist Catholics” was leaked and later withdrawn after public backlash. The bureau stated that the document did not meet its standards.
When this information came to light, Steve Friend, who formerly worked at the FBI, told The Daily Signal:
“It is clear that the FBI is failing to utilize counterbalancing sources of information in its efforts to generate intelligence products. Relying solely on sources such as SPLC, The Atlantic, and Salon demonstrates the FBI is beginning with a predetermined conclusion to target traditionally conservative Americans for undue scrutiny and persecution.
In this case, the FBI sought to target individuals holding pro-life, pro-traditional marriage, and pro-border enforcement political opinions.
Although many religious sects share these worldviews, the FBI placed the Catholic Church in the crosshairs in order to prop up a false political narrative about a rising threat of domestic terrorism.”
Two years prior, in 2021, federal engagement with school board conflicts—framed as a response to threats—raised concerns among parents that dissent on education policy could be interpreted as a threat to national security.
Taken together, these incidents have contributed to a growing perception that the language of extremism is being applied more broadly than before.
As The Heritage Foundation fellow Mike Gonzalez has observed, ideological movements going back to Karl Marx have viewed the family not as a neutral institution, but as something to be reshaped.
In "The Communist Manifesto," Marx “called for the abolition of the family,” framing it as bound up with broader social and economic structures.
Gonzalez argues that this impulse has resurfaced in more recent Marxist movements as well, noting that among the guiding principles of Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation was a call for the “disruption” of the nuclear family.
"Communists indeed tell us again and again that they are at war with the family because they know it is a handy way to destroy society," Gonzalez wrote.
The family, in that light, is not simply a private arrangement; it carries moral and cultural weight that shapes how a society understands itself.
Motherhood is not an ideology, nor is family life a threat category. They are among the most basic and enduring features of human society—realities that precede politics and outlast it.
If the language used to identify danger becomes imprecise or is weaponized against ideological opponents, it does not simply mislabel a problem. It risks obscuring the difference between what a society must guard against and what it must protect.
Live Action News is pro-life news and commentary from a pro-life perspective.
Our work is possible because of our donors. Please consider giving to further our work of changing hearts and minds on issues of life and human dignity.
Contact editor@liveaction.org for questions, corrections, or if you are seeking permission to reprint any Live Action News content.
Guest Articles: To submit a guest article to Live Action News, email editor@liveaction.org with an attached Word document of 800-1000 words. Please also attach any photos relevant to your submission if applicable. If your submission is accepted for publication, you will be notified within three weeks. Guest articles are not compensated (see our Open License Agreement). Thank you for your interest in Live Action News!
When faith, family, and motherhood are recast as 'extremism'
If you were asked to picture a domestic threat, you would likely imagine something overtly violent, radical, or destabilizing. What you would not expect is that the description might extend to ordinary Americans raising families, practicing their faith, or embracing traditional views of motherhood.
And yet, that is the concern now entering public debate, prompted in part by the reemergence of a little-known intelligence report from a handful of years ago.
In February, the CIA retracted a number of intelligence reports, and among them was a 2021 assessment that presented women who amplify the narrative of "traditional motherhood" as a possible "extremist" threat to national security.
In 2023, an FBI memorandum presenting "radical-traditionalist" Catholics as a domestic terrorist threat was leaked, and backlash ensued.
The traditional family is viewed as an obstacle to certain ideologies' vision for society — like Marxism. This view of the family as "extremist" is concerning and part of a larger pattern.
Motherhood and family life are among the most basic and enduring features of human society—realities that precede politics and outlast it.
In February 2026, the CIA formally retracted a number of intelligence reports after an independent review found they had failed to meet analytic standards.
Among the reports identified was an October 2021 intelligence assessment on women and extremist movements produced by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). The report was titled, "Women Advancing White Racially and Ethnically Motivated Violent Extremist (REMVE) Radicalization and Recruitment.”
According to findings from the President’s Intelligence Advisory Board, this and other affected reports “did not meet CIA and IC analytic tradecraft standards and failed to be independent of political consideration.”
And there is good reason why.
The report explicitly turned a spotlight of suspicion on individuals who “may not openly advocate violence” but who “amplify” certain narratives, like the idea of "traditional motherhood.".
When motherhood or family life appear within the same analytical categories as extremism — even as part of a study on messaging — this is concerning.
The 2021 report focused on how certain women allegedly engage with extremist movements through direct participation and by shaping and reinforcing the narratives those movements depend upon.
The report itself was narrowly scoped, but the concern among critics centered on how its categories were defined.
It described individuals who, while not necessarily involved in violence, might still contribute to the spread of certain "extremist" ideas. One of those "extremist" ideas to watch, the report noted, is when a group “has lauded motherhood and homemaking as women’s most important responsibility.”
The assessment went further, concluding that “female members have been emerging as key players” in advancing these movements by promoting what it describes as “the white REMVE view of traditional motherhood” and contributing to propaganda and recruitment efforts.
The CIA assessment is not the only example cited in this broader debate.
A 2023 FBI Richmond field office memorandum examining “radical-traditionalist Catholics” was leaked and later withdrawn after public backlash. The bureau stated that the document did not meet its standards.
When this information came to light, Steve Friend, who formerly worked at the FBI, told The Daily Signal:
“It is clear that the FBI is failing to utilize counterbalancing sources of information in its efforts to generate intelligence products. Relying solely on sources such as SPLC, The Atlantic, and Salon demonstrates the FBI is beginning with a predetermined conclusion to target traditionally conservative Americans for undue scrutiny and persecution.
In this case, the FBI sought to target individuals holding pro-life, pro-traditional marriage, and pro-border enforcement political opinions.
Although many religious sects share these worldviews, the FBI placed the Catholic Church in the crosshairs in order to prop up a false political narrative about a rising threat of domestic terrorism.”
Two years prior, in 2021, federal engagement with school board conflicts—framed as a response to threats—raised concerns among parents that dissent on education policy could be interpreted as a threat to national security.
Taken together, these incidents have contributed to a growing perception that the language of extremism is being applied more broadly than before.
As The Heritage Foundation fellow Mike Gonzalez has observed, ideological movements going back to Karl Marx have viewed the family not as a neutral institution, but as something to be reshaped.
In "The Communist Manifesto," Marx “called for the abolition of the family,” framing it as bound up with broader social and economic structures.
Gonzalez argues that this impulse has resurfaced in more recent Marxist movements as well, noting that among the guiding principles of Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation was a call for the “disruption” of the nuclear family.
"Communists indeed tell us again and again that they are at war with the family because they know it is a handy way to destroy society," Gonzalez wrote.
The family, in that light, is not simply a private arrangement; it carries moral and cultural weight that shapes how a society understands itself.
Motherhood is not an ideology, nor is family life a threat category. They are among the most basic and enduring features of human society—realities that precede politics and outlast it.
If the language used to identify danger becomes imprecise or is weaponized against ideological opponents, it does not simply mislabel a problem. It risks obscuring the difference between what a society must guard against and what it must protect.
Live Action News is pro-life news and commentary from a pro-life perspective.
Our work is possible because of our donors. Please consider giving to further our work of changing hearts and minds on issues of life and human dignity.
Contact editor@liveaction.org for questions, corrections, or if you are seeking permission to reprint any Live Action News content.
Guest Articles: To submit a guest article to Live Action News, email editor@liveaction.org with an attached Word document of 800-1000 words. Please also attach any photos relevant to your submission if applicable. If your submission is accepted for publication, you will be notified within three weeks. Guest articles are not compensated (see our Open License Agreement). Thank you for your interest in Live Action News!
Investigative
Isabella Doer
·
International
Isabella Doer
·
International
Isabella Doer
·
Politics
Isabella Doer
·
Politics
Isabella Doer
·Investigative
Isabella Doer
·International
Isabella Doer
·International
Isabella Doer
·Politics
Isabella Doer
·Politics
Isabella Doer
·
Analysis
Cassy Cooke
·Analysis
Cassy Cooke
·
