Relatable with Allie Beth Stuckey - Ep 127 | All Hail Abortion

Episode Date: June 19, 2019

Abortion has become a sacrament for the pro-choice powers that be, and they will stop at nothing to ensure its unrestricted, celebrated existence in America. 

Hey guys, welcome to Relatable. I hope everyone is having a wonderful week. So we've got a lot to cover because there's a lot going on in the news. First, I want to talk about the latest in abortion news. We talk about abortion a lot on this podcast, but that's because it's in the news a lot. And of course, it speaks to a shift in our culture. And obviously it has eternal and biblical significance as well, which falls under the category of things that we like to analyze on this show. Then we are going to cover part of the time. Clarkland survivor and two A advocate, Kyle Kachshuve and Harvard's decision to rescind his acceptance based on racist comments that he made a couple years ago. And then I want to discuss flag burning and whether or not it should be legal. And then if we have time, if we have time, I'm not sure that we're going to have time to cover all of this. But if we have time, I want to talk about this New York Times op-ed that I found really interesting. And it was titled, how should Christians have sex? And it covered purity culture, which is something that we've talked about on this podcast before.

I will warn you, I'm probably going to spend the majority of the time on the abortion topic because there's so much there. It includes Illinois's latest Illinois. I don't really know how to say that as a possessive. Any of you from Illinois out, wow, Illinois out there can tell me how to say it in the possessive way. But it kind of trips me up just a little bit. So we are going to discuss the latest law that is. Illinois pass. Is that better? And then we're going to talk about Joe Biden's flip-flopping on abortion. We're going to talk about the Hyde Amendment. And then if we have time, we'll talk about Clarence Thomas's recent comments on Roe v. Wade. So first, let us look at what passed the Illinois

legislature earlier this month. It was called the Reproductive Health Act. As you guys know, reproductive health equals a euphemism for abortion. That's what it is. It is a euphemism for abortion. It's a funny euphemism to use because abortion doesn't have anything to do with reproduction or health, but an entire legion of people desperately clamoring to sanitize the brutal reality that abortion is the killing of a child have decided to use this particular phrase to help them justify and to kind of sway any guilt that they feel for advocating for murder. So the goal of this bill is not to lower the maternity or the maternal mortality rate or to, to make having a baby better or safer for women. The goal of the bill is to make access to abortion through all nine months as easy as possible

period. You can go online and you can read the bill. That's exactly what it does and it's only what it does. So here's what the act actually states. Every individual has a fundamental right to make autonomous decisions about the individual's own reproductive health, including the fundamental right to use or refuse reproductive health care. So what we see here again, even in its stated person,

is this euphemistic language used to describe abortion. So let's just stop right there and think about that for a second. Abortion advocates do this a lot. They kind of talk out of both sides of their mouth. On the one hand, they say, okay, abortion is not that big of a deal. It's nothing. It's just this like any kind of other procedure that you do. It's just like going to the dentist and getting a cavity taking care of or something like

that. It's really not something that we need to make a fuss over. But if that were really true, why couldn't they just use the term abortion. Why couldn't they just use the term abortion in the stated purpose of this bill? But you hear this a lot. You hear about women's freedom. You hear about autonomy. You hear about reproductive health or reproductive health care. Why are they so afraid? Sometimes it seems like just to call it abortion. Or to say what an abortion actually is. That's also a theme among abortion advocates is that they don't want to talk about what abortion actually is, which is the killing of a child. It doesn't

matter which side of the aisle that you're on. That's what it is. They like to use phrases like termination of pregnancy. Again, they use euphemisms to try to morally justify what I think many of them know in their heart of hearts is wrong. The fact of the matter is, is that Planned Parenthood and the pro-abortion side, at least the powers that be on the pro-abortion side, they've done such a good job. And I don't mean a morally good job, but an effective job of skirting around what abortion actually is. And they've done such a good job that most people who support it really have no idea what abortion is. They really don't. If you asked the average pro-choicer what happens in a first or second or third trimester abortion, they couldn't tell you. I guarantee you, the average

pro-choicer could not tell you what happens in an abortion procedure. Furthermore, if you ask them about fetal development, what is happening to the fetus or the baby, I don't really care what you call it either one. If you ask them what is happening in that stage of development in the child's brain or body nervous system, whatever it is, they couldn't tell you. They could not tell you about pregnancy. They could not tell you about gestation. They could not tell you about fetal development. And yet, they have claimed to be the experts on science and women's bodies. That's because the resources on the pro-choice site never talk about what really happens. They really don't. So if you go to any academic website or any medical website or even Planned Parenthood's own website,

to learn what an abortion is. Say you're a woman seeking an abortion and you just want to know what the procedure is. It will tell you. These sites will tell you what an abortion is, but it's not going to use the term, it's probably not going to use the term fetus. It might, but it's more likely going to use the phrase terminate the pregnancy or tissue or fetal

tissue or in a DNX abortion, which we will touch on in a second. It might say cerebral contents. It will hardly ever use the, word fetus. It's definitely not going to use the word baby. It's going to avoid using as many human terms as possible, even though fetus, of course, is a human term. For some reason, people think that using fetus is more dehumanizing and more sanitizing than using the word baby, but it's just a stage of development in a baby's life. So we're not going to see terms like, or words like limbs or head or heart, even though these are all very accurate and necessary words to use when describing abortion.

but we'll hear words like tissue to describe a body and embryonic pulsing to describe a heartbeat. And the reason, of course, is that abortion advocates want desperately, they want desperately to pretend that what is being terminated is not a human being. It's not a life. It's not a person. And therefore, nothing is being killed. That's what they want people to believe. That's what they want themselves to believe. Abortion advocacy is entirely dependent on euphemisms, on deception,

and on feelings, not at all on accuracy, not at all on fact. If we go back to the stated purpose of this act, we know why this is. So it says every individual has a fundamental right to make autonomous decisions about the individual's own reproductive health. So we see that word autonomous. This word autonomy is one that we see a lot, not just in relation to abortion, but really in relation to a lot of issues, especially surrounding women. And that is because autonomy is the only value held when the God that you worship is yourself.

Autonomy, which means being able to control yourself and control your body is the only value that is held when the God that you worship is self. Increasingly, that is who we as a society have decided that we worship. The God of self, when you worship yourself, all that matters is that you are in control and that you get to do what you want to do, consequences be damned. It does not matter who is hurt by your decision when autonomy is your highest value.

This is part of why the whole self-love, self-obsession, self-affirmation culture that we see on Instagram and in self-help books that seems like it's edifying, that seems like it's positive, is actually toxic because it has an effect on how we view even life and death issues like abortion. when you believe that you are your object of worship, that you are your own God, that you are the

only moral arbiter that exists, you can justify absolutely anything. Everything is okay when you are your own God, including, but not limited to killing a defenseless child inside the womb. It is by denying the existence of the God of Scripture as the moral lawgiver in replacing him with the God of self that society has. has elevated autonomy to the place that it has, to be our chief value. And that has allowed us to justify all sorts of immorality. And it is this shift. It's this shift that has convinced millions of people in America that when a woman is pregnant, that she is the only human being that matters in that equation. They have been convinced that control of oneself and control of

one's life must be protected at all cause. Thus, convenience has to be clung to at all cause, and consequences are seen as a form of grave injustice that has to be avoided at all costs. And thus, we get the, quote, moral argument for abortion. That's really all they've got is autonomy. So there are two big things that the Illinois bill did. One, it denies that an unborn child has any rights. So the act states this word for word. word. Fertilized egg, embryo, or fetus does not have independent rights under the laws of this state. So what that means is that at no point in the pregnancy, at no point in the pregnancy, does an unborn child have any rights? So I'm 38 and a half weeks right now. This child inside my womb that

moves nonstop that is practicing breathing that is about to be born any day now has no rights simply because it is inside my body in the state of Illinois. So if someone decided in the state of Illinois to murder me and thus murdered my child, they would be charged with one homicide, not two. If they decided to assault me and I survived, but my baby didn't, they would only be charged for assault. They wouldn't be charged for murder even though my baby inside me died. It's the same thing in New York. The second thing that it does, it does a few things, but the two big things that we're talking about is saying that an unborn child has no right to any point in gestation. And then number two, it repeals the state's partial birth abortion ban act. And this is probably

one of the most grotesque parts of this bill. So let me first tell you what a partial birth abortion is. And then I'll tell you what repealing this actually means. So a partial birth abortion is actually called or is medically called a DNX abortion. You'll hear the argument from the pro-choice side that partial birth abortion is in. in a medical term, fine. If you don't want to use partial birth abortion, even though that's what it is, that's actually what happens, we can use the technical medical term that you'll find on a variety of pregnancy or medical sites, and that is DNX abortion. So that stands for dilation and extraction abortion. You don't have to take my word for this. I'm not getting this from pro-life sally.com. You can go anywhere

to any medical or academic site that will tell you what a DNX and abortion is. And again, they're probably not going to use very human or personable terms or personal terms, I should say, but they will tell you exactly what I'm about to explain to you in one way or another. So, D&X abortions are only used after 16 weeks. And the reason for that is because it's 16 weeks the baby is too big and moves too much. It's too squirmy to be killed in other ways. Typically, the bigger a child gets inside the wound, the harder it is to suck them out with a tube or to dismember them with forcips, as is typically done in the first and second trimester.

So that would be why when DNX abortion is used, that would be why it is used, because the child is just too big and too much to be killed in another way. So what a DNX abortion does is that it induces delivery. So this can be done in a variety of ways, but it induces delivery. The doctor delivers the baby breach. If you don't know what that means, that means that the baby comes out feet first. and when the neck of the baby actually reaches the birth canal, the abortionist goes in and cuts a hole in the back of the baby's skull, inserts a suction tube, and sucks the baby's brain out until the school collapses. Now, if you think that I'm describing a horror movie, I understand that it sounds like it, but I promise you, I'm not exaggerating. I promise this is not hyperbole. This is not Allie's Fictionary's Fiction Hour. Again, you can go online and you can look this up for yourself. Please don't take my word for it. So the abortionist cuts a hole in the back of the baby's skull. While the baby is a life, by the way, moving around full. flailing its limbs, I would assume, inserts a suction tube and sucks the baby's brain out until the skull

collapses. And like I said, this is all done when the baby is alive. They have traveled through the birth canal at this point. So they are definitely awake at this point. They are most likely moving. If the baby is far enough along, they are probably getting ready to take their first breath. They are instinctively getting ready to cry, instinctively looking for their mother. But instead, they are met with a puncture in the back of the head. And before They know it. Their brain has been sucked out. Now, if you are ignorant of, and I don't mean this in a pejorative way, but if you are ignorant of how what a baby looks like inside the womb at 16 weeks or further, and if in your mind you're picturing some kind of blog, then you have

some learning to do. You just need to go on any pregnancy website whatsoever, not necessarily an abortion website, just any pregnancy website whatsoever. And you will see that at 16 weeks, they are fully formed. They're still underdeveloped. They still have growing to. do. They still have development to do, but they're fully formed. I mean, my baby, I saw her at 11.5 weeks she was fully formed. She was moving around, hands and feet, spinning her head around. They're moving. They've been moving for a long time. And at 16 weeks, you're probably actually starting to be able to feel your baby move. At 20 weeks, you've been able to feel her for a while. At 24 weeks and onward, of course, those movements are very strong. There is no doubt whatsoever. There's no medical

disagreement on whether or not this baby is alive and can very likely feel pain. We also know I actually read this the other day in a pregnancy resource that I was just reading for myself, not for abortion, that babies actually cry inside the womb, that doctors have been able to see the crying reflex start to develop inside the womb. Do we know if tears actually come down? No, but when there's a loud noise, when there's something to react to a baby's chin quivers and you see them open their mouth like they're trying to scream or they're trying to react to something. I cannot imagine. I cannot imagine the reaction that happens when they are met with a knife to the back of the neck or when they are met with a needle that is meant to stop their heart. I cannot imagine the pain

and the brutality and the gruesome nature of what is happening inside the womb. And one day we will be able to see it and there won't be any question about what is actually happening. Now, you may be thinking, Ali, isn't there a federal ban on this horrific act? Isn't there a federal ban on partial birth abortions? Yes, there is, except to save the life of the mother. But a couple things. The reason why this is still significant that Illinois decided to repeal this as a state, one, it shows where they'd like to go for the future. So if the federal ban is overturned, which it probably will be, if Democrats take over Congress and take over the presidency as well, if the federal ban against partial birth or DNX abortion is overturned, Illinois wants to make sure that the state doesn't stand in the way of that. So it tells you where their priorities are, that they, of course, are totally fine with this happening at any stage in pregnancy. The second reason why this is significant, why it's important to know that they're repealing this and why it's even important to know that there's an exception for the life of the mother to this day in America, according to the federal ban on partial birth abortion.

is because there is never, there is never a reason to perform a partial birth abortion to save the life of the mother, ever, ever. Now, you might be thinking, Allie, how do you know this? Are you a doctor? Do you have an MD? No, I'm not, and I don't have an MD, but you don't have to be a doctor to read and understand basic logic. So, D and X abortions only happen after 16 weeks, usually after 20 weeks. Babies as young as 21 weeks have survived outside the womb. You can look that up yourself. You're not just going to find that on pro-life sites. You're going to find that on basic news sites. You're going to find that on CNN. 21 weeks. That is in the middle of your second trimester. So babies born at 21 weeks have survived outside of the womb. Babies at 24 weeks are considered viable, which means they have a really good chance of surviving outside of the womb. A 24 weeks is still in the second trimester. So that means if in the extremely rare case that a mother will die, if she's remains pregnant anytime after 21 weeks, the child needs to be delivered, not killed. So whether by abortion or by delivery, a baby is going to come out. So can you tell me if this is to save the life of the mother, if this is to save the life of the mother, if the baby needs to be removed for the

mother to live, why does the baby also have to die? Can you give me a medical reason for that? And abortion involves a lot more intervention than a C-section and is a lot more dangerous to the mother than an induced labor is, which is why the line that a DNX abortion is only used to save the life of the mother is complete hogwash. It's not true. It would never, ever be true. An abortion in the third trimester to save the life of the mother does not make any sense. By the start of the third trimester at 28 weeks, a baby has a 97% chance of surviving outside of the womb. So if that mom needs to deliver the child in order to live, you deliver the child. You deliver the child. child. You don't kill the child. The child has to come out either way. It doesn't make any sense.

And so I guarantee you a DNX abortion in Illinois, what they want is to be able to perform this gruesome act without any restrictions whatsoever and for any reason. Hardcore abortion advocates want legal abortion through all nine months without restrictions, period. It doesn't matter how the baby is killed and it doesn't matter why. I tweeted this the other day about, the Illinois law and the brutal nature of D&X abortions. And it ended up getting a lot more attention and pushback than I, than I'd realized. I actually woke up yesterday morning and I realized I had all of these notifications

about this tweet and I hadn't even noticed it. All these leftists commenting on this just saying, you're a liar. You're a liar. This is such a lie. Wow. People make things up. People quote tweeting this saying,

wow, I can't believe you would make this up. There's so much misinformation out there. You're spreading false information. You're so crazy. Really? Is this a lie? Am I a liar? Because I read the bill.

Did you? I read the bill and I researched what a D&X abortion is. Did you? Apparently none of them did. But this is what they do. They deny, deny, deny without ever having to come up with any kind of logical defense behind their denial because even the most passionate abortion advocates struggle with reconciling their humanity with a justification of the brutal killing of a defenseless baby.

So they will just say, You're lying. You're lying. And they'll deny that the baby exists. And when you say, well, here's my research. That's what I did. I said, here's my research. Here's a resource that I know you guys will trust, CNN, that says that the bill overturned or repealed the partial birth abortion ban in their state. And here is a resource that says with medical sources what a DNX abortion is. They say, well, it hardly ever happens. Or when it does happen, it's for a good reason. So you'll see the goal. post move because they don't want to come to terms with the reality of what they're defending. And this is why it's become so easy for politicians and for the powers that be on the abortion side

to make an argument for overturning something like the Hyde Amendment. The Hyde Amendment restricts tax dollars from directly funding abortion. Now, of course, we know that Planned Parenthood still gets $500 million from the government every year from the government, aka us. And they are the country's number one abortion provider. that money is movable. So we already are, in essence, funding abortion by funding Planned Parenthood. But the Hyde Amendment does say that our money cannot go directly to paying for abortion. It has been in place for a long time. All the Democratic candidates now are supporting overturning that.

They're supporting getting rid of the High Amendment saying that no taxpayers should absolutely be forced no matter what to fund abortion. There have been many people, many Democrats over the I would say most Democrats over the years, even pro-choice Democrats, have said, you know what, I'm for abortion access, but I don't want people who are conscientious, subjectors to be forced to fund it. That's changing now. The reason that it's changing is because they have gone along this line of saying that health care is a right, and abortion is health care.

Therefore, we should pay for it. Joe Biden, however, who fancies himself a religious person, has been against, has been for the Hyde Amendment for many years, all of his career, really. So however long that is, I think it's 108 years or something. He has always supported the Hyde Amendment, has always said, you know, I support a woman's right to choose, but I don't believe that taxpayers should be forced to fund abortion. Well, he has totally reversed that. He has reversed 40 years of support for the Hyde Amendment, or he's really, yes, for the Hyde Amendment. And he has decided, you know what? This is what he said. He said, if I believe in health care is a right as I do, I can no longer support an amendment

that makes that right dependent on someone's zip code. So what they're trying to do is they're trying to make this about equality and justice and income inequality and things like that when it really has nothing to do about that at all. And this, of course, is what AOC said when she was on the news the other day. She said that's really what the Hyde Amendment is all about. The Hyde Amendment isn't about abortion per se. another genius line of reasoning from AOC. The Hyde Amendment, she says, is truly about equality of health care and health care access

for low-income women and women of color and women that get caught in our mass incarceration system. And so the Hyde Amendment is about income inequality and it's about women's health care and a system of income inequality. So I think we need to repeal it. What? What absolute garbled nonsense? That doesn't make any sense whatsoever.

The Hyde Amendment is only about a problem. abortion. Homegirl just says whatever she wants to say and she tries really desperately to make it sound somewhat coherent. And whenever she's on a leftist news show, they just nod their head and say, yes, yes, AOC, that is absolutely right. She's not even saying anything logical. I mean, if there's one smart thing about this girl is that she does not go on any networks that would ever argue with her, she does not go up in debate against anyone that she knows is smarter than her, which is about 99% of the country. And so she is just able to say these ridiculous things

without getting any pushback and feel like a hero. I mean, it's really crazy. It's really crazy what she's able to get away with. But unfortunately, so much of the pro-choice side is so indoctrinated with this euphemistic nonsense that they really just kind of let it go. Now, what I will say, though, is that the majority of the majority of pro-choicers, I think,

the majority of pro-choicers actually are not on board with what people like AOC and other Democratic politicians, people at NARAL, people at Planned Parenthood, celebrities, they're not on board with their absolute enthusiasm for abortion. I don't think they are. I'm pretty sure that the majority of Americans still see abortion as something that's, that is a net, they probably see it as a necessary evil. Now, I don't think it's necessary at all, but I think a lot of people, see abortion as a necessary evil, but not something to be celebrated. There was an NPR poll that says, even though the majority of Americans don't want to see Roe v. Wade overturned, they do want significant restrictions in place. So the poll says that 61% said that they were in favor of a combination of

limitations that included allowing abortion in just the first three months of pregnancy, only in cases of rape, incest, or to save the life of the woman, or only to save the life of the woman. So those were the restrictions that they had an option to choose from. And 61% chose one of those limitations. And so this whole idea that women want abortion through all nine months on demand without any questions asked just is not supported by the polls. And I think the Democratic politicians are completely out of touch when it comes to this. Now, they might be successful in moving the dial.

They might be successful in moving people to the left on abortion by being so radical and extremist, or, and this is what I hope happens, it backfires. And people realize, hey, hey, hey, hang on, just a second. This used to be a safe, legal, and rare thing. And now this is something that we are celebrating as a sacrament. I'm not sure I'm on board with this. Chelsea Handler actually posted a picture of her and some other people wearing shirts that said abortion AF on it over and over again. And I was actually extremely encouraged by the comments that I read from pro-choicers who said, okay, hang on, I'm for a woman's right to choose, but this is not something that we need to be celebrating. This is in total poor taste. And this is not something that we need to be

lifting up in glorification. This is a difficult choice for many women. And even though we're for freedom, we're not for abortion. Now, I still think that they're wrong. I still think that their perspective that abortion is necessary in any case is wrong. However, I am heartened by the fact that they still may see it as a necessary evil and not as a necessary good, as so many on the left seem to. And so I think that there is hope in reaching into the image of God that is in some people and reminding them the humanity of life inside the wound because that's really been lost in all of this, is that you're talking about a second life.

Whether you want to believe that or not, biologically, you are talking about a second life. And I've never heard a good argument for why that second life doesn't matter, for why it's okay to kill them. I've never heard a good argument for it. There's just not, which is why they deny that it exists because it's much easier to build an argument on autonomy

on women's rights than it is on the fact that killing an unborn child is somehow okay. Now, I knew I was going to talk about that for a long time. I didn't know I was going to talk about it for that long, but I do want to get into a couple more things and maybe I'll just skim over them really quickly. So I do want to get into Kyle Keshue. He is a pro second amendment advocate. He was a Parkland shooting survivor. I don't know Kyle very well at all. I think I've met him a couple times. We've spoken at the same kind of event. So I can't vouch for Kyle's character. But so, well, let me tell you what happened. So a couple years ago, he was in, I think it was a gaming chat room and he said the inward over and over again. And someone recently released

screenshots of that. And he had already been accepted into Harvard, but he just heard this past week that because of the screenshot of him saying the inward several times, that his acceptance has been rescinded. Now, it is totally within Harvard's right to rescind his acceptance. But it's also a question of, okay, are you now going to go through every single teenager that you accept as a freshman, are you going to go through all of their social media history, or not even all of their social media history, because I think that's fair game, all of their private conversations? Are you going to go through all of their private conversations to make sure they've never said anything racist or anything inappropriate? I think that we can question

Harvard on that and still say what Kyle said was wrong. And I get it. It was only a couple years ago. It's not like it was 10 years ago. It was only a couple years ago. And so it might be fair for people to say or to ask, okay, is this a part of who he is? But also at the same time, how many of us said really stupid stuff that we wish that we didn't say when we were 16. Now, I'll just go ahead and say because I said on Twitter, you know, a lot of these people who are condemning him are acting so self-righteous as if they've never said anything that they don't regret. And of course, you had left us saying, oh, that means you used to say this too. That means that you're a racist. No, my friends and I never used this word. It wasn't a word that we used.

as a joke. It wasn't a word that we thought was funny. I have always known every single day of my life since I knew what this word was. This was a word that you never used. It would never be a part of my vocabulary. So you can just get off me with that accusation. But have I and everyone else probably, I don't even know, but we probably all said stupid stuff that we regret, especially when we're 16. And if we're all to be held by the standards of the things that we said we were 16, we're screwed. We're all screwed. So I think that we need to give people when we can a little bit of grace for the things that they said as kids. Yes, it was only two years ago for him, but two years ago he was 16.

And 16 is really young. Like your brain isn't even developed until you're 25. And so we do and we say stupid stuff. That's why driver's insurance, when you were 16 years old is so high. It's not because necessarily you can't drive. It's because you make stupid decisions. 16-year-olds make stupid decisions. They say stupid things.

That's not justifying or excusing anything that he said, but it is to say, okay, maybe all of us can kind of step off our soapbox for a second, get off our high horse and realize none of us has been perfect our entire lives. And if we were held by the standards of every private conversation, that we had when we were 16, we'd all be pretty embarrassed. And most of us would probably be disqualified from taking part in the public conversation. I am willing to give him grace on this and give him the benefit of the doubt. Unless there has been something that's come out recently that shows that demonstrates that he is a racist, then I think that we should all be a lot more

merciful, realizing that we probably don't have a place to be casting stones. I just think that that's probably true. Even if you are, even if you have been absolutely perfect or close to perfect in your life, I still think that there's a place for grace. And I'm not just saying that because he's pretty much on my side of the aisle or else I assume he is on my side of the aisle on most things. I would be saying this about anyone who was getting dragged for something they said when they were 16. So that's my stance on that. I want to say also with the flag burning thing because I know I disagree with some people on my same side. So President Trump tweeted, all in for Senator Steve Danes as he proposes an amendment for a strong ban on burning our American flag,

a no-brainer. Then you had a lot of conservative commentators come out and support that and say absolutely. But I don't support this at all. I do not support this at all. Like I said on Twitter, the indestructible nature of the flag is that it can be burnt. Like that is the amazing thing about America is that the flag represents free speech. The flag represents our values. The flag represents that something bigger than the flag. A lot of people are saying, well, the military fought and died for this. Like, no, they didn't. They fought for your right to destroy the flag if you wanted to. Now, I'm not saying it's right. If I saw you destroy the flag, they'd probably be, I would have a really hard time not punching you in the face. It is the most disrespectful thing you can do to this country,

or it's not the most disrespectful. It's one of the most disrespectful things that you can do to an important symbol of this country. But do I think that you can do, but do I think that you can do, that it's punishable by law? No, I don't because I believe in free speech and I believe that it qualifies as freedom of expression. And so does the Supreme Court, by the way. And so I am more for personal liberty, for individual liberty than I am for holding on to the sanctity of the American flag by telling people you are not free to burn it. Now, if you burn my flag, obviously, that's a problem. That's my personal property. But if you burn your flag, I mean, I think that you're an idiot, but go for it. I don't think that you should get thrown into jail for that.

I think that if you hate this country, you shouldn't be living here. But, but do I want you to be free to do that? Do I want you to be free to hate this country? I do want you to be free to hate this country in America. That's the beauty of American liberty. That's the radical nature of American liberty is that you are free to hate this country. You are free to talk badly about our president, about our lawmakers. You are free to talk badly about our founding fathers, about our constitution. I mean, the existence of the left at America is actually the perfect representation of just how radical American freedom is because they hate so much of what America stands for and they voice it all of the time and yet they're free to do so.

We are willing to allow that kind of dissent. We are willing to allow that kind of debates because that's what America is. Now, we could get into the fact that they also want to shut down anyone who, disagrees with them, but we won't. So the American flag represents something so much bigger than the material itself. It represents a radical value of individual liberty that is encompassed in one of our fundamental rights, which is free speech. And burning the flag, whether you like it or not, is an expression of free speech. So that's where I stand on that. Okay, that's all we really have time for. We could talk about how Christian should have sex. It's that New York Times opinion piece. But I actually did.

so you can go and read it. But I did an episode, episode 81 called purity culture and purity culture that episode really covers a lot of what she is saying and refutes a lot of what she is saying. She talks about how bad and terrible purity culture is growing up. I agree with some of it, but I still think we should take a biblical approach to it, which is what I did in episode 81. So if you're interested in listening to that, you haven't already. I encourage you to. If you've got any questions, please email me, Allie at theconservative millennial blog.com. of course follow me on social media if you so choose subscribe to youtube you can watch my videos there if you don't already and i will see you guys back here on friday