COGIC Bishop Darrell Hines Addresses Rap Music, Women’s Dress and the WNBA

The Battle for the Mind Begins With What Children See and Hear Every Day

The speaker begins by repeatedly telling himself to stop.

He recognizes that he is becoming emotional and does not want his feelings to control what he says. The subject is clearly upsetting him, particularly when he considers the cultural influences surrounding children and teenagers.

Yet beneath the emotion is a concern he believes parents cannot afford to ignore.

Children are growing up surrounded by entertainment, social media, music, sports, fashion, celebrities, advertising, and online personalities that can influence how they think about themselves and the world around them.

The speaker’s central concern is not simply that individual pieces of entertainment may be inappropriate.

It is repetition.

What children repeatedly see and hear, he argues, eventually begins to shape their thinking.

That idea becomes the foundation of the message.

He discusses concerns about sports, including his personal decision that he would not allow his daughters to watch certain professional sports because of what he believes those environments may communicate about sexuality and identity. His comments become increasingly emotional, and he repeatedly stops himself because he realizes he could move from making a point into speaking from frustration.

That distinction is important.

The speaker is attempting to make a broader argument about cultural influence rather than simply criticizing individual athletes.

He then turns toward music.

He recalls trying to listen to some of the music children consume today and describes being shocked by its explicit language and themes. He compares it with older music that, in his view, could be suggestive without being as openly graphic.

The difference, he argues, is not merely musical style.

It is the environment surrounding young listeners.

Modern children can access enormous amounts of content without waiting for television programming, radio schedules, or parental permission. A smartphone can place virtually unlimited entertainment directly into a child’s hands.

The speaker believes this changes the responsibility of parents.

Parents can no longer simply ask where their children are going.

They also have to ask where their children are going online.

That becomes one of the strongest ideas in the message.

A parent may know which friend’s house a child is visiting while having no idea which influencers that child follows. A parent may know what school the child attends without knowing what videos dominate the child’s feed. A parent may know who a child’s friends are in person while remaining unaware of the online personalities shaping the child’s attitudes.

The speaker therefore challenges parents to expand their definition of supervision.

“Parent the screen” becomes the central phrase.

Parents, he argues, have to establish boundaries around what enters the home digitally just as they establish boundaries around what enters physically.

That includes music.

It includes videos.

It includes social media.

It includes influencers.

It includes conversations taking place through phones.

And it includes the cultural messages embedded within entertainment.

The speaker repeatedly returns to the principle that attention produces influence.

Whatever continually receives someone’s attention eventually begins to shape the person’s thinking.

The concept is presented as more than a parenting strategy. It is described as a spiritual principle.

Romans 12:2 becomes the biblical foundation: believers are instructed not to conform to the world but to be transformed through the renewing of their minds.

The speaker emphasizes that the battle is for the mind.

That changes the way parents should think about media.

The question is no longer simply whether something is technically appropriate. Parents must also consider what repeated exposure is teaching.

A single song may not seem significant.

A single video may appear harmless.

A single social-media post may not appear influential.

But hundreds of similar messages can create an environment in which certain ideas begin to feel normal.

Repetition has power.

The speaker argues that children are particularly vulnerable to this process because they are still developing their values and understanding of identity, relationships, morality, and social expectations.

This is why he believes parents must pay attention not only to what their children consume but also to what they repeatedly consume.

The message then expands beyond entertainment.

Culture itself becomes what the speaker describes as a powerful influencer.

Culture is loud.

It communicates through advertising, fashion, politics, sports, celebrities, television, music, social media, and countless other channels.

The speaker turns to Isaiah 5:20, which warns against calling evil good and good evil, and against confusing darkness with light.

For him, the passage illustrates the danger of cultural normalization.

Things that previous generations might have considered inappropriate can gradually become ordinary when people encounter them repeatedly.

The process can happen so slowly that parents may not notice the change.

Something initially shocking becomes familiar.

Something familiar becomes acceptable.

Something acceptable eventually becomes expected.

That is why the speaker believes cultural influence must be recognized before it becomes deeply embedded.

He also expresses concern about fashion and the way young women present themselves. His language becomes particularly forceful as he criticizes clothing that he believes lacks modesty.

Again, he frames the issue as part of a larger cultural environment.

Young people do not create their values in isolation. They absorb messages from the world around them.

If popular culture repeatedly presents a particular appearance, behavior, or attitude as desirable, young people may eventually regard it as normal.

The speaker believes parents therefore have to be intentional rather than passive.

Simply assuming that children will figure everything out for themselves is, in his view, inadequate.

Parents must teach.

They must discuss.

They must monitor.

And they must explain why certain boundaries exist.

This does not mean every cultural influence is automatically harmful. The speaker’s broader argument is that parents should stop treating culture as neutral.

Every environment communicates something.

Every repeated message teaches something.

Every influencer is influencing.

The important question is whether parents are aware of what their children are learning.

That is why the speaker’s advice about social media becomes especially direct.

Parents should ask not only, “Who are you with?”

They should ask, “Who are you following?”

They should ask not only, “Who did you call?”

They should ask, “Who is influencing you?”

These questions recognize that influence increasingly occurs outside the physical spaces parents can see.

A child may spend only a few hours with friends but spend several additional hours scrolling through carefully designed digital feeds. Those feeds are not random. Algorithms repeatedly deliver content that keeps users engaged.

Over time, the child’s attention can become concentrated around particular ideas, personalities, lifestyles, and values.

The speaker believes parents must therefore become more intentional about digital parenting.

The screen is not simply a device.

It can function as a teacher.

It can function as an entertainer.

It can function as a peer group.

And, in some cases, it can function as a moral influence.

The challenge is not necessarily to remove every form of modern entertainment. Instead, parents are encouraged to understand what is entering their children’s minds and to establish boundaries before harmful patterns become deeply rooted.

The message ultimately returns to the same biblical principle.

Transformation begins with the mind.

And the mind is influenced by what repeatedly receives attention.

That makes the parenting responsibility considerably larger than checking homework, enforcing curfews, or knowing where children are physically located.

Parents must also understand their children’s digital world.

They need to know what their children watch.

They need to know what they listen to.

They need to know which celebrities they admire.

They need to know which influencers they follow.

They need to know what messages are being repeated.

Because children are learning all the time.

The question is not whether they are being influenced.

They are.

The real question is who is doing the influencing.

The speaker’s message is ultimately a call for parents to stop surrendering that responsibility to culture by default.

The world will teach.

Entertainment will teach.

Social media will teach.

Celebrities will teach.

Advertising will teach.

The only question is whether parents will also be present to teach, guide, challenge, and protect.

The battle for a child’s mind does not begin when a crisis appears.

It begins much earlier, with every song, video, conversation, image, and message that repeatedly captures attention.

And once that influence becomes habitual, changing it can become far more difficult.

That is why the speaker’s warning is ultimately less about one particular sport, song, outfit, celebrity, or social-media platform.

It is about attention.

What receives attention receives influence.

What receives influence can shape thinking.

And what shapes thinking can eventually shape a life.