Relatable with Allie Beth Stuckey - Ep 481 | Thank the Lord: Texas Heartbeat Bill Is Law

Episode Date: September 1, 2021

We start off with some good news: A heartbeat bill takes effect today, which empowers citizens to sue doctors who perform abortions after around six weeks. Naturally, this has the Left up in arms. Hilariously, they think that this bill makes the GOP comparable to the Taliban. We discuss the slippery morality that allows progressives to be pro-abortion, then we transition into discussing the latest data on vaccines, mask-wearing, and why vaccine passports are tyrannical and help no one. --- Today's Sponsors: Annie's Kit Clubs provides a fresh way to dive into your favorite craft or try something new. Making things with your hands is so good for you & Annie's makes it easy. Go to AnniesKitClubs.com/ALLIE & save 50% off your first kit! Good Ranchers has traveled the US, meeting with actual farmers that raise the livestock to ensure the product they're sending you is the very best American craft beef and better-than-organic chicken. Go to GoodRanchers.com/ALLIE & use code 'ALLIE' at checkout to sve 20% on each box of mouth-watering meals, plus get an additional $20 off & free express shipping! Prayer Bowls are uniquely hand-crafted ceramic or or wooden bowls that hold your prayer intentions. These bowls are lovely & come with a bundle of Prayer Cards. Go to PrayerBowls.com to order today & get a set of Scripture cards free with the offer code 'ALLIE'. --- Past Episodes Mentioned: Ep 480: Better Than 'Be the Bridge:' Biblical Unity | Guest: Monique Duson https://apple.co/3BvEh9l Ep 473: Carrie Underwood Gets It: Masks Don't Belong in Schools (with Data) https://apple.co/3zAMoRy --- Show Links: Texas Senate Bill 8 (SB-8): "Relating to Abortion, Including Abortions After Detection of an Unborn Child's Heartbeat; Authorizing a Private Civil Right of Action" https://bit.ly/2WCAisZ AllieBethStuckey.com: "Why Kids (And You) Shouldn't Be Forced to Mask:" https://bit.ly/37XCkG1 New York Intelligencer: "The Science of Masking Kids at School Remains Uncertain" (Aug 20, 2021) https://nym.ag/3sHQep2 New York Post: "Study Finds N95 Masks More Effective Than Surgical, Cloth Coverings Against COVID-19" (Aug 22, 2021) https://bit.ly/2Y8U7Z0 --- Buy Allie's book, You're Not Enough (& That's Okay): Escaping the Toxic Culture of Self-Love: https://alliebethstuckey.com/book Relatable merchandise: https://shop.blazemedia.com/collections/allie-stuckey

Hey, this is Steve Day. If you're listening to Allie, you already understand that the biggest issues facing our country aren't just political. They're moral, spiritual, and rooted in what we believe is true about God, humanity, and reality itself. On the Steve Day show, we take the news of the day and tested against first principles, faith, truth, and objective reality. We don't just chase narratives and we don't offer false comfort.

We ask the hard questions and follow the answers wherever they leave, even when it's unpopular. This is a show for people who want honesty over hype and clarity over chaos. If you're looking for commentary grounded in conviction and unwilling to lie to you about where we are or where we're headed, you can watch this D-Day show right here on Blaze TV or listen wherever you get podcasts. I hope you'll join us. Hey, guys, welcome to relatable. Happy Wednesday. Hope everyone is having a wonderful week. If you haven't listened to yesterday's episode, my conversation with Monique Dusson about actual biblical, racial unity and reconciliation within the church that is.

is not laden with critical race theory and all kinds of secular theories that, unfortunately, we've seen infiltrate some Christian conversations about race and racism. You need to go listen to that or watch that on YouTube. She is wonderful and provides a lot of resources for us who are trying to navigate that space with both sympathy and with truth and with a gospel-centered approach. Today we are going to talk about some COVID stuff and some vaccine passport things and the truth about vaccine efficacy and why some of the arguments being made about Christians being selfish or not loving their neighbor by not getting the vaccine. They just don't hold up very well in light of the facts. But first I want to talk about some good news.

So the first half of the episode is going to be talking about this. And that good news is a new law that goes into effect today in Texas. And that is SB 8 or the heartbeat law. So this law bans abortion after the detection of a heartbeat, which is usually at about six weeks gestation. It requires physicians to try to detect a heartbeat of an unborn child in pregnancy. So here's what the law says. and I will link the actual law, the text of the law in the description to this episode. So you can read the law for it yourself.

But here is one part of it. Unless it is a medical emergency, a physician may not knowingly perform or induce an abortion on a pregnant woman unless the physician has determined in accordance with this section whether the woman's unborn child has a detectable fetal. heartbeat. So the doctor must also record how he or she detected the heartbeat, record the gestational age, and record the methods used to detect the heartbeat and estimate the gestational age. Also, the law says, except in the case of medical emergency, a physician may not knowingly perform or induce an abortion on a pregnant woman if the physician detected a fetal heartbeat for the unborn child, as required by Section 171, 203, or failed to perform a test to detect a fetal heartbeat. A physician does not violate the section if the

physician performed a task for a fetal heartbeat as required by Section 17103 and did not detect a fetal heartbeat. So removing a child from the womb who has already been miscarried, who has already died inside the womb, obviously does not count as an abortion and obviously is not prohibited by this law. anyone who tries to tell you that the law is actually explicit, that it does not prohibit the procedure of, for example, a DNC in the case of a natural miscarriage. Now, here is the catch with this law, and I don't mean that in a negative sense. This is the thing that allows this law to pass constitutional muster while we still have Roe v. Wade enforced. This law is entirely enforceable on the civil level.

So meaning that the state is not empowered through this law to throw physicians or anyone involved with abortion in jail or to punish people involved with abortion. This law enables anyone in Texas who is not an agent of the state to sue someone who is involved in abortion. So any person, the law says, other than an officer or employee of a state or local governmental entity in this state may bring a civil. civil action against any person who, one, performs or induces an abortion in violation of this subchapter. Two, knowingly engages in conduct that aids or abets the performance or inducement of an

abortion, including paying for or reimbursing the cost of an abortion through insurance or otherwise. If the abortion is performed or induced in violation of this subchapter, regardless of whether the person knew or should have known that the abortion would be performed or induced in violation of this subchapter or three intends to engage in the conduct described by subdivision one or two in this law. So basically, this law empowers people who want to protect babies to be able to do so through civil litigation. That makes it very costly, very risky for physicians to perform abortions, for traffickers to pay for abortions, for anyone to seek an abortion to kill their child. You can bet that there is going to be a lot of weeping and gnashing of teeth

from Planned Parenthood, Neyroll, the ACLU, and all the celebrity influencers who are going to tell you this is The Handmaid's Tale. This is sending us back to the 1950s that these male politicians just want to control women's bodies. This is what patriarchal authoritarianism looks like. And here's my response to that. And here's how. I want to help you respond to that. You can use all the euphemisms you want, all the fear mongering, all the hyperbole, you can lament over the loss of so-called bodily autonomy and so-called reproductive justice, all you want to. But nothing you say or do changes the fact that abortion kills a human. You can try to deny that by using nonsensical anti-science language.

that it's just a quote potential life or that life inside the womb is not actually life yet. You can say that it's not really a baby. I've even seen this very strange new age method crop up recently in defending abortion that abortion just sends the soul back into the universe to wait for another host for it to occupy. It's nonsense. And yet it is a way. to try to make yourself and to make those around you feel better about what abortion is. The fact is that unless we define human life as beginning at conception, we weighed into very dangerous territory of deciding based on very subjective feelings-based standards what life is and what life is not. If it's not the moment the egg is,

is fertilized, or at least there's some debate about this among pro-lifers, at least implantation, when that fertilized egg attaches itself to the uterine wall, then when does human life begin? And why? Because in that moment, at conception, that child's DNA makeup is present. Their eye color, their sex has all been determined. That is a human being. We don't determine human status by size or by appearance or by age or by ability.

or by location, you determine human status by what we know about biology. And biology says that every single human starts out as a fertilized egg. And as a fertilized egg, has everything that makes us human. He or she simply needs time and nourishment to let these characteristics grow into a fully formed baby ready for birth. When people say that a baby in the womb is not human, that is just a clump of cells, that is anti-science. If a baby in the womb is a clump of cells, then we are all just a clump of cells. What they actually mean, whether they realize it or not when they say that, is that they don't consider the human in the womb a person.

And personhood is considered a more philosophical, subjective debate. There's no debate, no real debate, over whether life in the womb at all stages is a human being. Some do debate what makes a human being a person. So with worth and dignity and rights, namely a right not to be murdered and at what stage. But again, I would argue if we say that some humans do not have personhood, so are not people, which is what you're saying, if you say that a human in the womb is not really a person, then we have, again, waded into very dangerous territory, the likes of which have characterized. the greatest human rights atrocities throughout history. Acknowledging that someone may be technically human or saying, arguing that someone may be technically scientifically human, but doesn't deserve the dignity and the rights that come with being a person, should probably ring a bell to you when you think about some of the gravest injustices, the greatest forms of oppression and the worst genocides that you've heard about. The only objective standard then is to say that a human is a person always. No matter the age,

no matter the size, no matter the ability, no matter whether that person is rich or poor, wanted or unwanted in orphan or living with their parents, depending on someone else for care or independent, only heartless tyrants and barbarians remove a group's personhood status in order to justify killing them. And it takes a special kind of cruelty to do that for the most vulnerable, voiceless, and helpless group among us, unborn children. Unborn children who, in an abortion, and this part is graphic. I share this from time to time to just remind us really, literally, what we're talking about. Unborn children in an abortion either die by poison or by an induced heart attack that is accomplished by sticking a needle through the abdomen of the mother into the

amniotic sack that the baby is in or directly into the chest of the baby so that the baby squirms, fights for life, and likely in pain at that stage until his or her heart stops beating. The chemical combination used for this procedure is the same chemical combination used for lethal injection for convicted murders who receive the death penalty. So isn't it interesting that many who are against the death penalty for people who have committed the most heinous crimes against humanity are unabashedly for using the same method of death for babies. After ensuring fetal demise in later first and then second trimester abortions, the baby is then dismembered using forceps and is removed from the mother's uterus that way.

You actually have to crush the skull of the baby in order to be able to extract the baby from the mother's uterus and birth canal. And then there are even more grotesque methods of abortion. used later in the pregnancy, which comparatively are rare, but they still happen. We're talking about fully viable, meaning can live outside the womb. So usually after 24 weeks, but sometimes even earlier, which is still the second trimester, by the way, we're talking about those fully viable babies are aborted every single year. And I know people say to that, well, late-term abortion is only chosen by the mom when absolutely necessary to save her life, the mom's life. Well, that's not

actually true. If a woman has a medical condition that requires getting the baby out after 24 weeks gestation and maybe even a little bit before that, the solution is delivery, not abortion. Because either way, in a live delivery or an abortion, a birth happens. It's just either a still birth induced by abortion or a live birth. Either way, the baby comes out. So it just, it doesn't even make logical sense to say that abortion is necessary after, you know, and the weak of viability to save the mother's life. And if it's before that, if it's a true medical emergency, this Texas law does allow abortion, although it does require the physician to do everything within her power to save the baby as well as the mother, as it should be. And I'm sorry,

but a baby having special needs is not a good justification for killing the baby. That is ablest, it is morally gruesome. And there are parents. lined up to adopt children. People don't like to talk about that. And it's true that unfortunately, our adoption process is complicated. And in some cases, it is overly regulated, although there are a lot of regulations that exist for a good reason.

But there are many parents who are waiting to have a child and who are also ready and willing to have the resources to raise a child with special needs. It's not a good reason to kill a child. I am not naive to the dire situations women find themselves in when it comes to unexpected pregnancies. And I know there is no in to this propaganda saying that the GOP and pro-lifers are really just pro-birth, that we don't care about the babies after they're born or we don't care about the mothers. And that is the biggest lie that you can possibly imagine.

Christians, pro-lifers, who tend to also vote Republican, though not always, poor their lies. their energy, their money into helping vulnerable moms, babies, and families. They make up, this group makes up the vast majority of adopters. They are often foster parents. They donate so many of their own resources to help those in need. It's just who they are. It's just what they do. They run the pregnancy clinics that provide free testing, free sonograms, free parenting

classes, free supplies, help with adoption, help with employment, help with Medicaid enrollment, help with refuge from abusive partners, help with education. Most things Planned Parenthood does and will not do. A Planned Parenthood praise upon impressionable poor women tells them that abortion doesn't really kill a baby and that their life will be better if they just abort their child, just like their father, the devil, they steal, they kill, they destroy, they deceive. So you can miss me with the whole, well, I'm holistically. pro-life thing, meaning that you're for abortion being legal, but you're also for a bunch of,

you know, government social programs and open borders and masks, et cetera. We can debate the effectiveness of those other policies. That's fine. But if you are not against making the murder of babies in the womb illegal, then you don't have the authority to tell everyone else what it means to be, quote, really pro-life. Like, that is the baseline. That's the easy, most obvious, most fundamental thing to advocate for if you really care about protecting the vulnerable and the voiceless, this marginalized, oppressed group of babies in the womb. It's just demanding trying to make abortion illegal. It's just demanding that this group has the most basic right granted to us in our founding

documents, the right to life. And in the most literal sense, the right not to be murdered. If someone asks you to defend why you are anti-abortion, or when you see Christians talking about the so-called nuance of this and being for the legalization of abortion but against abortion personally, whatever the heck that means, before you defend your position, you ask them why. You ask them why they believe it should be legal to kill an innocent defenseless human. And if there are other situations in which they believe killing an innocent defenseless human should be legal, their answer will likely be no, they probably don't think it should be legal, for example, for a poor, desperate mother or father to kill their five-year-old or to hire someone to kill their five-year-old. They would probably say the person you're talking to that those parents are cruel, they should be in jail.

Okay? My question is, why does that standard change just because the child's, is younger, smaller, and in the womb. Again, our age, size, dependency, and location really how we determine whether or not a person should have rights? Those are very arbitrary. And they may say something, the person that you are discussing this with, say something about, you know, coat hangers and back alleys. And again, I would ask a question. Do you use that kind of thinking to fight against the criminalization of other kinds of assault? If your argument is that banning abortion, doesn't stop abortion, but just makes it more dangerous for the woman.

Do you use the same argument to say that murder or rape or abuse should be legalized so that it's somehow safer for the people involved? And for the love, for the love of all things. Good. Please do not send me that graph that shows abortion declining more when Democrats are president. We have debunked that. Presidents don't make laws.

State and federal legislators do. And while Barack Obama was president, where you see what appears to be a steep drop off of abortions while he was president more so than, for example, when Bush was president. While Obama's president, state legislatures were dominated by Republican majorities, the most since FDR. And for most of his tenure, Congress was dominated by Republicans, too. So if you're going to ascribe the reduction of abortion to policies enacted while Barack Obama was president, you're going to have to ascribe that reduction to the people actually. making policy during those eight years, who were mostly Republicans. Also, we don't just make things illegal to reduce the instances of those things. That's one reason, but not the only reason. We also do it to protect the rights of the victim and of the potential victim, and because it's the

right thing to do. Making abortion illegal recognizes that that human being in the womb has dignity and rights because he or she is human. So always remember that. I've given you a lot of arguments, a lot of ways to defend this. And if you're on the other side of this, a lot of things to hopefully think about. You're going to hear a lot of compelling arguments or what seem like compelling arguments. I've actually never heard a logically compelling argument for abortion. Never. Not even when I was giving testimony about pro-life legislation when I was in Congress. And I heard some of the arguments from Democrats, the people who are supposed to be our, I mean, people in Congress are supposed to be our intellectual leaders. I think that, you know, we all know that that's not true,

but actually seeing and hearing their arguments for abortion, I realize that they have no better arguments than their random trolls online. Like, there is no logically good argument for abortion, but you are going to see arguments online. You're going to hear a lot of testimonies. You're going to see a lot of graphics on Instagram, a lot of misinformation, about this particular Texas law, a lot of feminist anger over the next few months, a lot of, you know, pictures of people walking around and like their handmade's tail, you know, red hoods or whatever. And you're going to see this a lot in the months leading up to the midterms next year. And the thing to always keep in mind, if you can't remember everything we've talked about today,

the one thing to always keep in mind and to come back to in every conversation about abortion and abortion law is the humanity, the reality of the baby in the womb. his or her life matters. And the question that you make the other side answer before you say anything about your own position, which is the obvious position that we shouldn't kill babies inside the womb, before you even try to defend that, you make the other side answer why they believe that taking the life of an innocent human being is justified just because that life can't defend themselves.

Do babies in the womb deserve human rights? Primarily, the basic right to life. And if not, why not? give me a good answer that doesn't make you sound like a tyrannical lunatic. And if, if not, why does anyone else have rights? Age, size, dependency, location, all those arguments fall apart when you realize that if you apply them to people outside the womb, things get pretty ghoulish and genocidal real quick. Biblically, we know Psalm 139 makes clear that God forms us with intention and love and purpose in the womb. We believe all people, no matter how small, are mating

God's image and are therefore worthy and dignity, worthy of dignity and right. Biblically and historically, we see that child's sacrifice is always the mark of the most depraved societies, the societies that are most deserving of wrath. Historically, we see that children are always the most vulnerable victims of abuse, of manipulation, exploitation that's true today. There is no nuance that can make your support of this legally or otherwise justifiable and in any sense. And again, you can't come at me with while you conservative voters don't treat them with dignity after they're born, that's not true. What you actually mean is that because we're not delegating our responsibility to care for the least of these to bureaucrats, we must lack compassion. No, I don't believe in giving our God-given call to care for others to the government.

I believe in doing that work ourselves. No party is perfect, but voting for the party that funds and openly celebrates the brutal murder of babies could not be. be me. It just, it could not be me. Voting for the party that seeks to protect those babies, yeah. Like, that's, that's going to be the main thing for me. That's going to be the main thing for me. And I do also just want to note, if you're someone who has had an abortion, going back to the biblical portion of this, there is grace for you. There is redemption. There is forgiveness. There is reconciliation to God through Christ. There is nothing that you can do. There's nothing that you've done in your past that makes you too far off from God, that makes you not worth saving or not

worth loving. There are only two categories in this world. As we talked about yesterday with Monique, dead and sin are alive in Christ. All of us who are alive in Christ, who have been forgiven by God, who are walking with the Lord, are not there because of anything that we have done. but as Ephesians 2 also says verses 8 through 10, we were saved by grace through faith. And grace means unmerited favor. So it doesn't matter what you've done in your past. There is nothing that you've done that is too much for God to forgive. There's nothing that you can do that would make you through Christ unworthy of God's love.

And so if you haven't already go to him, go to a counselor about this, go to a pro-life pregnancy center. they often provide post-abortion counseling. Go to a trusted church member about this. And church, if there are people in your community who have had an abortion or you know is struggling with this, it is our obligation to provide refuge for them and to provide love and grace to them. And so I wanted to make sure that I make that clear as well. There is a way that we can speak compassionately and lovingly about people.

people who have gotten abortions and still be so strong and so clear on this abortion issue to try to change as many hearts and minds as possible and to try to save as many lives as possible. By the way, it is possible to change people's minds on this. This is the number one issue that I get an email about from people saying you changed my mind or really God changed their mind and heart. And thankfully, and graciously, he allowed this podcast to be a vessel that he used to help change people's mind. Number one subject that I get emails on, that I get messages on of people saying,

you know, I listen to your argument on abortion, and I really hated it, and I dug my heels in, and I didn't agree with it. But I realized that I couldn't justify it. I couldn't find a way to defend it. And so God can also graciously use you, a humble vessel to have conversations with people and to hopefully change their minds on this. It is absolutely possible. And this is just a great example that God is working even when things seem like they are

only going a bad direction. This is a really good direction. So just pray, like pray that this, pray that this law holds strong and pray for our elected officials that they would continue to legislate with boldness and with a virtue. I want to talk a little bit more about this. That's going to transition us into the COVID stuff. Hey, this is Steve Day. If you're listening to Allie, you already understand that the biggest issues facing our country aren't just political.

They're moral, spiritual, and rooted in what we believe is true about God, humanity, and reality itself. On the Steve Day show, we take the news of the day and tested against first principles, faith, truth, and objective reality. We don't just chase narratives and we don't offer false comfort. We ask the hard questions and follow the answers wherever they leave, even when it's unpopular. This is a show for people who, who want honesty over hype and clarity over chaos. If you're looking for commentary grounded in conviction and unwilling to lie to you about where we are or where we're headed, you can watch this D-Day show right here on Blaze TV

or listen wherever you get podcasts. I hope you'll join us. So there are other good laws going into effect in Texas today. Also, a lot of people are talking about this online, which is why we're bringing up Texas requirement for officers to wear body cameras, the entirety of every investigation, online ballot tracking system for mail-in ballots, banning critical race theory themes in classrooms, expanding access to medical use of marijuana for people whom it may benefit, like people with autism and epilepsy. So go Texas legislature. You are doing a lot of good things. Greg Abbott has

signed a lot of good laws this session. I'm sure that there are, you know, many other states that are doing good things as well. Texas seems to always be. in the spotlight because it's seen as this kind of Republican stronghold. And so Democrats and the liberal media, but I repeat myself, love to shine a spotlight on Texas to show what a, you know, backwards, terrible place it is. But go Texas, GOP, you are doing a really good job. So I want to transition by reading a couple tweets and a headline that shows some pretty a pretty remarkable mindset among our media class. So Dan Rather, he tweeted yesterday,

it's worth noting that many of the same people attacking the Biden administration for leaving women's rights behind in Afghanistan are eager to control women's bodies and choices in the United States. Unfortunately, this tweet has, like I think as I'm speaking, it has like almost 90,000 likes, which is insane. An opinion writer, Dean Obadala for MSNB, B.C. wrote this stellar, stunning headline last week, Afghan women's rights are threatened, but the GOP isn't their champion. The Taliban aren't the only ones. Oh, my gosh, just like if you ever hear yourself saying the Taliban aren't the only ones in the next part of your sentence is to compare it to anyone in America, just stop. Just stop. Give yourself the swirly and stop talking.

the Taliban aren't the only ones trying to impose their will on women's bodies and choices by Dean Obadala. So the argument here in case it's not clear enough is that pro-lifers in America are like the Taliban. You know, the Taliban, the roving group of barbarian terrorists brutally murdering and raping women and children, boys and girls, who like other Islamic regimes in the region, are selling children into sex trafficking on a daily basis, forcing six-year-old girls to get married, preventing women from learning how to read, preventing them from driving, leaving their house without a man accompanying them, or speaking less spoken to. That's what Sharia law says.

See, the people in the United States who don't think it's right to dismember babies are the terrorists. But somehow, the people for the death penalty for babies are the good guys. Interesting. So you'll see, again, that the argument that pro- lifers make that it's wrong to kill babies is never actually addressed by these people, which shows you how weak, how weak their position actually is. They use every language game in the book to obscure what abortion actually literally is and why, and why we're against it by just using vague terms like women's bodies, choices. We don't want to police women's bodies. We don't want to

limit people's choices. Unless those things involve kill. a baby. Yeah, then we have something to say about it. Just like all sane people have something to say about all other kinds of assault and murder, we just think that standard also applies to innocent babies in the womb. There is no good argument for abortion. None, none. But there's another tweet that represents a similar wild mindset on children wearing masks. And it comes to us via Obama's education secretary, Arne Duncan. Yes, Obama's education secretary. So this is not what you will call nut picking, like looking for just like a random Joe Schmoe on the other side to try to characterize all of the left with that random nut. No, this is Obama's education secretary. He tweeted this and

then deleted after understandable backlash, quote, have you noticed how strikingly similar both the mindsets and actions are between suicide bombers at Kabul's airport and the answer mask and anti-vax people here? They both blow themselves up, inflict harm on those around them, and are convinced they are fighting for freedom. It's really, you know, sometimes doing the show is really hard for me not to cuss. Like, sometimes they're harder than others. Like, it's really, really hard. Holy Spirit. Help me. Oh my goodness. We just had 13 American service members die because of a suicide bomber. And you're trying to say that people who question the efficacy of masks here in the United States are the same as an ISIS case suicide bomber.

I have so much that my tongue wants to say right now, so much that I am holding in. I will let your imaginations fill in the blank for me. Have you noticed how quick, mainstream, high up, influential people on the left are to call their political opponents terrorists? And we're talking about Dan Rather, MSNBC, secretary or education secretary for Barack Obama. Let me just say that there is a far stronger case for tweets like this inciting violence than there is a case for anything Trump said directly inciting violence. It is so ugly. It's so depraved.

They're such calloused, ugly depraved hearts. It is also, and this is how we're going to transition into the rest of the show, it's also illogical. It's illogical, this kind of thinking. First of all, we know that people who are vaccinated can get and transmit the virus. The vaccine is pretty effective from what we've seen at preventing severe infection, hospitalization, and death, but it does not stop you necessarily from getting infected or spreading the virus. Again, it might, might make it less likely to do those things, but it doesn't stop it completely

here, or there's not even necessarily a really high likelihood of it stopping you from transmitting the virus once you are infected with the virus. Here is some news out of Duke University, according to News Observer. Quote, Duke University has set new restrictions to mitigate the spread of COVID-19 as cases are rising on the Durham campus despite its vaccine mandate. So has vaccine mandate. In the first week of classes, 304 undergraduates, 45 graduate students, and 15 employees tested positive for COVID-19. All but eight of these individuals were vaccinated, and the vast majority of them are asymptomatic. A small number have minor, cold, and flu-like symptoms, and none have been hospitalized, according to the university. Duke administrators announced the new guidelines in an email saying,

quote, this surge is placing significant stress on the people's systems and facilities that dedicated to protecting our health, safety, and the ability of Duke to fulfill its educational mission, particularly our isolation space for on-campus students who test positive. But as Nate Silver, who created the website 538, as he notes on Twitter, or he questions, which I think is a good question, how is it placing significant stress on the system if none of the cases are hospitalized and almost all of them are asymptomatic? And the overall positivity rate is just 1.6 percent. This is a great example. He argues of the vaccines working, but the logic that they are using here to try to enforce more restrictions, it doesn't really make a whole lot of sense. And this is also an example. Yes, maybe of the vaccines allowing for more asymptomatic cases, although we don't know necessarily since these are probably mostly young people if they would have been asymptomatic anyway. We're not really sure. We also don't know what's the deal with those eight people who are vaccinated also if there was a vaccine mandate how did that happen are they faring any worse than the people

who are who are vaccinated i think that would just be interesting to know but it just does show that things can spread and things can spike even when the vast vast majority of people in a place are vaccinated um they are also because of this requiring everyone to wear masks outside where we know scientifically covid is very very very very unlikely to spread so it's just a reflex, it seems like, some of these restrictions. So again, the point is that the virus is spreading even among those who are vaccinated. I know three people personally who have gotten, who have gotten COVID, despite at least being partially vaccinated. And again, you don't know my vaccination status. I'd be saying this either way. Either way I am saying this. I'm not saying. I've

never discouraged people from getting it. My concern is logic, the science, following the science, and also freedom. I'm saying it's illogical to blame the spread of COVID on people who have not gotten the vaccine in Israel, where 60% of the population is fully vaccinated, nearly 70% have had at least one dose of the vaccine, where some of the greatest restrictions have been placed, including fines for not wearing masks and vaccine passports, they're experiencing a surge of cases even bigger than the one that they had in January when only about 5% of the country was fully vaccinated. And all you have to do to fact check that is to type in Israel vaccination rate on Google and then Israel COVID cases. I don't usually use Google, but they do have the

information right at the top really easy when you type this into the search bar. Now, the deaths in Israel right now are lower during this surge than in January. Very, very few deaths in either surge, though, by the way. So you could say that that's due to the vaccine and that's good, but you can't say that it's really preventing the spread. It should also be noted that Israel lifted its mask mandate on June 15th because of a decline of cases and then reinstated it on June 24th and go look at the case numbers and pinpoint that date June 24th. It didn't help. As we have talked about as we have gone through the data on this on this show mask mandates are really not proven to help stop the spread.

I will link the post I put together with all the studies on this as well as the New York magazine article that shows that there is no evidence that kids benefit at all from wearing masks as well as a new study that found that really only one type of mask Only at most a couple type of masks are at all effective. And I will read you a quote from that article in just one second. All right. So the New York Post summarized this study from Waterloo. And it says this, quote,

The results show that a standard surgical and three-plied cloth masks filter at apparent efficiencies of only 12.4% and 9.8% respectively, according to the University of Waterloo Studies conclusion. And that apparently probably, I am assuming from what I see here, is that even that efficacy, like even that effectiveness of the masks is dependent on how you are wearing the mask, if the mask is totally clean, whether the mask has gotten wet at all from saliva, how long you have been wearing the mask. And so I would assume this means perfectly fitted, perfectly clean, perfectly dry masks, as soon as you put them on, only have a 12.4% effectiveness

if they're the standard surgical masks, so those kind of like blue masks, and 9.8% effectiveness if it's a cloth mask. This is according to, again, to the University of Waterloo. But KN95, and in 95 masks, afford, quote, substantially higher apparent filtration efficiency, 60% and 46% for R95 and K-N-95 masks respectively, than the more commonly used cloth masks and surgical masks. And therefore are still the recommended choice in mitigating airborne disease transmission indoors. I have personally never worn a K-N-95 or in-95 masks when I have been required to wear masks. I wear cloth mask that has gone through the washing machine many times, or I wear a surgical mask. Most people, the vast majority of people are not wearing R95 masks.

Most people are wearing cloth masks, and they're wearing them incorrectly. And again, once they become wet, they're totally ineffective, which is one reason why kids wearing them in school doesn't make sense. Like even if you pack several masks for your kids, it just ends up not being effective. because of how kids function. And that's exactly why in Scandinavia, in the UK, and even Australia, where there are very heavy COVID restrictions, none of these countries, in addition to other countries, enforce masking among young kids.

And in some places, no students of any age are required to wear masks. And the spread in those countries has not been worse than the spread in the United States. The U.S. stands apart in its draconian expectation of two-year-olds to wear masks. It is anti-scientific nonsense. It is really a reflective reaction from both politicians who just want to, you know, CYA and parents who I think sincerely want to protect their kids. And they just don't realize that masking kids is really actually political. And it's not scientific or coming from a place of compassion for the people who are making

these policies. So when I say that forcing little kids to wear masks, is abusive. I am not calling parents malicious abusers. And I understand in some situations, like you're forced to, you're forced to, you have to, you're in a district that is actually forcing it, or you're going on a plane, you don't have any other choice. I totally understand that. I don't think it is the intent of parents who make their young children wear masks to be abusive, but I do think that the impact of forcing a child to wear something over their face, even if they grow to like it, when there is no.

physical benefit that's been proven and may actually be physically harmful. I think it's coercive. I think it's unhealthy. I think it's irresponsible. As we noted a couple weeks ago, I'll link that previous episode in the description as well. Doctors Marty McCari and Dr. Coe Meisner wrote for the Wall Street Journal that masking children not only can negatively impact them developmentally, but may also affect their facial development. And I will link to that specific article. Zach Ringelstein is a child trauma specialist who wrote a piece for Forbes just the other day arguing that masks for kids can cause serious trauma for them. And guess what? Forbes actually took the piece down. Insane. Just like the American Academy of Pediatrics took down their years old study discussing why children and babies need to be able to see their caregivers speak and see them smile.

The only reason we know the CDC's mask findings show that masks don't. don't do any good in schools is because of that New York Magazine journalist who actually dug into the study passed what the summary of the study said, which didn't include the findings of the masks. I'm sure the people that are censoring legitimate perspectives, information, and science are doing it all for our safety and all because they love our kids so much. Sure. I'm sure. I am sure. The same person, by the way, who authored the New York. magazine article analyzing the CDC's findings also tweeted this graph which i will uh which i'll put up if you are watching on youtube uh which shows that the fully vaccinated adult is actually more likely

to die of covid than the unvaccinated person under the age of 30 um and especially children so like the fully vaccinated adult over um i think it's let's see uh the fully yeah so the fully vaccinated, literally, the fully vaccinated person that is over the age of 30 has the same likelihood of dying from COVID. And in some cases, a greater likelihood of dying from COVID than the person under the age of 30. For example, like if you're 40 years old, if you're 40 years old, your risk of dying from COVID, if you are fully vaccinated, is still higher than the risk of a kid dying who is unvaccinated from, who is unvaccinated, dying from COVID. And so this hysteria that we're seeing from some parents, parents who insist that their kids

can't go back to normal until their kids can get a vaccine or are blaming all of these unvaccinated adults for potentially spreading the virus to their kids are not living in reality, both because the vaccinated can spread it and because their kids still really are not at risk. I know there are kids that get it. I know kids with underlying conditions can die from it, but also, as we've noted, more kids died from the flu in six months in 2018 and the 2018 flu season than have died from COVID over the past 18 plus months. Now, back to the vaccine. Israel also released a study last week that shows that immunity to COVID is much stronger and unvaccinated people who have had COVID than vaccinated people who have never had COVID. And I'll read you a little bit of

that study in just one second. Okay, so what this study out of Israel found was that those who had been vaccinated were 13 times more likely to be infected by the Delta variant, what's called a breakthrough infection and those with natural immunity. They did find that there may be some extra protection for people who have had COVID and had one shot, but people who have had COVID had far greater immunity and far longer lasting immunity than those who hadn't had COVID and were fully vaccinated. And Singapore recognized this. And so they have decided to give up the goal of COVID zero because they have such a high vaccination rate and the vaccinated are still spreading. And they realized, okay, if people are gaining immunity from getting COVID,

then it doesn't make a whole lot of sense for us to keep on putting these very restrictive measures in place to try to get no COVID whatsoever. Because this is still spreading, even though Singapore has an 80% vaccination rate among the adult population. The only country higher than that is Malta's vaccination rate at 82%. And so they're saying basically, look, we're going to, probably have to live with the virus, which, by the way, people have been saying since the very beginning of all of this, that viruses are going to virus, that you can't completely and totally get rid of it. Even the common viruses, the common diseases that we are vaccinated against, they're not totally always, they're not always completely and totally eliminated. And you have to

weigh the risks and benefits of the policies that you are putting in place that are taking away people's freedom and livelihoods. Australia apparently has also realized this. They are ending the COVID-zero policy. They've realized it's, quote, not a sustainable way to live. That's what Prime Minister Scott Morrison has said. And so they are going to ease the restrictions once 80% of adults are vaccinated. Now, this also comes after mass protests in Australia. So good freaking job Australians pushing back against the tyranny that really just did not make sense. Helen Andrews and the American Conservative, she also makes a really good case against vaccine passports, not just because it doesn't, not just because it doesn't make sense

scientifically, because you should be able to show an antibody test as well if you're going to have a vaccine, if you're going to have a vaccine passport. But also, it doesn't make that much sense because you can still spread if you have the vaccine. But most importantly, It's tyrannical and it sets up this structure for social surveillance that I promise you. No matter what side of the aisle that you're on, you are not going to like. It infringes upon too much freedom in the name of a very weak, a very flimsy, wobbly promise of potential temporary safety. It's just not worth the exchange. And so I wish, I hope that there is some bipartisan support when it comes to pushing back again.

vaccine passports, they're unnecessary, and they're tyrannical. All right, that's all we've got time for today. I will see you guys back here tomorrow with an amazing, amazing, amazing conversation. I can't wait for you to hear it and tell me what you think. So make sure that you tune in then. Hey, this is Steve Day. If you're listening to Allie, you already understand that the biggest issues facing our country aren't just political.

They're moral, spiritual, and rooted in what we believe is true about God, humanity, and reality itself. on the Steve Day show, we take the news of the day and tested against first principles, faith, truth, and objective reality. We don't just chase narratives and we don't offer false comfort. We ask the hard questions and follow the answers wherever they leave, even when it's unpopular. This is a show for people who want honesty over hype and clarity over chaos. If you're looking for commentary grounded in conviction and unwilling to lie to you about where we are or where we're headed,

you can watch this Steve Day show right here on Blaze TV or listen wherever you get podcasts. I hope you'll join us.