← Relatable with Allie Beth Stuckey
Loading summary
Transcript1 lines
- [00:01]
Ali Stuckey
David French has seemingly reversed his view on transgenderism, calling a man she in the New York Times. Also, there's some confusion about birthright citizenship and whether it's something we as conservatives, as Christians should support. A terrible story about a pregnant woman losing her baby when she was being detained by ICE has been making the rounds. But as always, we've got to ask the question, is it true? We'll be talking about all of this and more on today's episode of Relatable. It's brought to you by our friends at Good ranchers. Go to good ranchers.com use code ALI at checkout. That's good ranchers.com code ALLY hey guys. Welcome to Relatable. Happy Monday. Hope everyone is having a wonderful week so far. A couple housekeeping things. Remember, this is the week that we start three times a week. If you need my full announcement and explanation for why we are going down to three times a week, you can go back and listen to Thursday's episode or watch Thursday's episode. So Monday, Wednesday, Friday will be the new schedule. But this Friday we won't have an episode because it will be July 4th. Yay. So excited. It's like one of my favorite days of the year and I hope you guys have fun. Plants. This is the actual no Kings Day. You remember that super lame protest from a couple weeks ago? The same people that were begging the governments to force churches to close down and force us to mask our toddlers on airplanes are now pretending that they are against tyrants. You remember that silly demonstration? Actual no. Kings Day is July 4th forth where we celebrate our country and the values that she is supposed to represent. The freedom that our Constitution guarantees no matter what politician is in office. We can be thankful to God for these things and do our best in every sphere of our lives to preserve these principles. Also, we've got amazing merch that's out, y' all. I'm so excited. We partnered with Carly Jean Los Angeles for this new stuff. We've got T shirts, plant seeds that bloom in eternity. That's what it says on the back. These are CJ LA shirts. On the front is a little embroidered R for Relatable with a little bouquet on the front too. We've got these two hats and what you're seeing right now is not all of the color schemes that we have. You'll have to go to alimerch.com to see all of that. We've got razor respectful ruckus on a crew neck sweatshirt. These sweatshirts are super thin. I love Them. I wear them even in the summer because they're not giving you a whole lot of warmth. They're just a nice light layer. And then we've got the other one, the other crew neck that says, self love won't save you, but Jesus will. I think the picture does not do that crewneck justice. It looks a lot better in person. The front has the little embroidered R on both of those. The razor respectful ruckus, self love won't save you. The little embroidered R on the dad hat. That's what that style is called. And then the trucker hat or the rope hat. It has the little relatable megaphone printed on the front. We've got a tote with the plant seeds that bloom in eternity design. And again, we've got different colors of all these things. I love them so much. I will be wearing one of these. I haven't decided which. I think on the show tomorrow. Go to Ali. No, tomorrow I have to wear my 4th of July gear that I have. But I will be wearing these at some point because I love them so much. We haven't had merch in a while, y' all, so go to al merch.com relatabro if you're listening to or watching. Your wife wants relatable merch. She just does. So go to allymerch.com all right, it's Monday, so I'll just remind you that God's eternal plan of redemption is always going off without a hitch. And all you are responsible for doing at any given moment, whether you are changing a diaper, washing dishes, sending an email, or you are doing some big bold action act of courage and obedience and evangelism, is to do the next right thing. In faith, with excellence and for the glory of God. In faith with excellence and for the glory of God. That's all you can ever have the capacity to do. Empowered by the Holy Spirit. It is a good life being a Christian, because we get to trust God for all of our needs and to conform even the desires of our hearts into his desires. And he is going to take take care of us. I read this line the other day in a devotional that said, trusting in God and His sovereignty means I am never the first one on the scene. And I just stopped as I read that. I'm never the first one on the scene. So no matter what room or space you enter, no matter what job you are about to do, whatever role you are about to fulfill, God has already been there. He's not restricted by linear time. The way Humans are. He is outside of time. He is sovereign over all of it. And he has arranged everything in your life to accomplish through and in you exactly what he wants to accomplish. That is a good life that Christians get to live. No matter what you are going through, he is going to complete your journey of sanctification because he is faithful to do that. All right, today's a news episode. That's what format we're doing. It's news Monday, theology Wednesday, interview Friday. So we'll always have a little theology on Monday because we've got to. We've got to be reminded of who is in charge as we get into the craziness of what's going on in the world. And the craziness right now is in the pages of an outlet called the Dispatch. And it has to do with David French, whom we have spoken of many times. David French, if you don't know a columnist for the New York Times, you might be thinking, well, yeah, David French is a progressive. Then if he writes for the New York Times. And so, of course, you're going to have have an issue with him. But you see, David French didn't always write for the New York Times. He wrote for National Review. And he has billed himself as a true principled conservative, a conservative of all conservatives, the most conservative, the conservative est, if you will, because he has stood against Donald Trump based on principle. And there have been times in my life when I have been pretty sympathetic to David French's position, when it seemed that he was critiquing Donald Trump from the right, when he was so conservative and so constitutional that he just couldn't get behind someone that he saw as an authoritarian, someone whose values didn't align with his biblical faith. But as time has gone on, he has gone the way of people like Russell Moore that because maybe not because of, but alongside of his disdain for Donald Trump, he has also become more progressive. And so I take his arguments against Donald Trump much less seriously. Obviously, it's a lot more convincing for a conservative like me. When you have a conservative case against Donald Trump and the Republican Party or the policies that he's putting in place. But when your argument is actually mushy, or when it's compromising or when it's unbiblical, when it's progressive, then you're just not really someone that I can take seriously as, like, this principled conservative. I'm just like, yeah, you don't like Donald Trump because you're more liberal than conservatives. And of course you don't like his conservative policy because you're a progressive. And David French has become more progressive. And the most recent sign that we have seen of this is that he is now calling a man who recently decided to identify as a woman she. When previously David French would say, no, I'm not going to do that. In fact, in 2018, while writing for a National Review, French refused to use the name Chelsea for former army intelligence analyst Bradley Manning. You remember, so called Chelsea Manning, and this is a person who now thinks that he is a woman. He argued then in the pages of the National Review that using Manning's preferred name did not align with his Christian belief. So I will sometimes even use people's preferred name. I just won't say that a man is a she. And David French even went beyond that. Okay, when you go even, like, beyond where Ali Stuckey is typically when it comes to gender, I mean, that's like, that's very conservative. He said that he wouldn't even call Bradley manning Chelsea in 2018. But now he's totally changed his tune. Now French refers to Brian Riddell. I think that's how Ridal. I'm not sure how you pronounce his last name. Who is a Manhattan Institute senior fellow who now, it has just been announced, rights for the Dispatch, where David French is a senior editor and his preferred name, Brian Rydell's new name, is Jessica. And so it was announced that Jessica is writing for the Dispatch. And David French says, this is great news for the Dispatch. Nobody is better on fiscal policy than Jessica. Jessica and I recently had a great conversation about the grim realities of the federal budget on the opinions podcast. Link in next tweet. Now, I think that David French was being particular about not saying she in this post. I think that he said Jessica twice because he didn't want the discord in his replies. But if you look at an article that he wrote in the New York Times in which he interviewed Brian Riddell, he says this. He says Jessica might be one of the nation's foremost experts about the federal budget and about America's fiscal realities, and she has taught me an enormous amount about those issues. So I am delighted that Jessica is joining us for this conversation. Okay, so he is using those female pronouns. Now, you could say the New York Times would never allow him to use male pronouns for someone who identifies as a woman. But if you are so principled and you are so on the side of truth and reality, David French, would you really allow an editorial team of the New York Times or anywhere to compel you to lie? Because that's what you have done in this particular article. So let's go back and read what David French said in 2018, why he was so adamant about telling the truth about gender and only referring to men as he and as their birth names. We'll get into that in just a second. Let me pause and tell you about our first sponsor. It's seven Weeks Coffee. Seven Weeks Coffee is America's only Pro life coffee company. I love seven Weeks for multiple reasons. One, I love the taste. I love that it's clean, pesticide free, mold free, the highest quality coffee that you can find. And most importantly, I love that it is Pro Life. The reason why it's called Seven Weeks is because it's seven weeks gestation. That baby is the size of a coffee bean. And that baby, no matter how small, is made in the image of God. And that is why his or her life matters. And protecting that life really matters to God and to us. So Seven Weeks donates 10% of every sale of Seven Weeks coffee to Pro Life organizations. They have raised over $900,000 for these pregnancy centers. That has translated into saving thousands of baby lives, serving thousands of moms and dads in crisis. And so you can allow your coffee to serve a higher purpose. Subscribe to their Heartbeat Club. When you do, you save 15%. When you use my code at checkout Ally, you save an extra 10%. It's a great discount. Go to 7weekscoffee.com use code ALLI for that discount. 7weekscoffee.com code alright. In 2018, when he was writing about Bradley slash Chelsea Manning, the article was titled the Transgender Debate. Conservatives Cannot Compromise truth. This was published on May 19, 2018. He argued that conservatives must hold firm to the biological reality of sex and resist compromising on truth. In the transgender debate, he said, the transgender debate is not about tolerance, it's about truth. Conservatives cannot, must not compromise on the biological reality of sex. And they cannot pretend that surgically or chemically altering the body somehow changes that reality. He specifically addressed the case of Bradley Manning. He says, this is David French in 2018, just seven short years ago. I won't call Chelsea Manning she. It's not a matter of disrespect. It's a matter of truth. To use female pronouns is to endorse fiction and, and I won't do it. The push to mandate pronoun usage, David French says, is a direct assault on free speech and religious liberty. When the state or culture demands that we lie with our words, it's not just a social Norm, it's tyranny. The irony is in all of this, David French has been arguing for years that evangelicals, that conservatives have accepted a tyrant in Trump because he has promised to give us some of the things that we want that he would say. We've abandoned the Bible, we've abandoned the Constitution, all in service of this God of Maga, this cult like, this cult like association with Donald Trump. And yet here he is submitting to what he has called tyranny by calling a man she. He is now writing fiction in the New York Times either because his conscience has changed on this, and if so, let's hear it. Let's hear the facts that have changed, that have made you change your mind on this. His faith has changed. He doesn't believe that biological, physical reality actually trumps this inner spiritual voice that tells a person that they're not actually their biology. He doesn't care about God's authority. That God says in Genesis 27 that we are made male and female in his image and he is simply and. Or he is simply submitting to the authoritarianism of the New York Times, which says, yeah, you have to lie. You have to affirm someone's stated identity no matter what reality says. David French often talks about how evangelicals have lost our credibility because we've compromised for Trump. David French has compromised the integrity of Christianity and biblical truth by lying in this way far more than any Trump voting evangelical ever has. Because at least those of us who have voted for Trump and are conservative Christians, at least we are honest about some of the issues that we have with Trump. But the stakes in each election that we are considering and the why behind voting for a policy platform on the Republican side that is better than the policy platform on the left side. Without completely dismissing some of the moral issues that we have with Donald Trump personally, but we are still taking the Bible seriously. We just realized that no politician is going to be perfect and we see the insanity, the debauchery, the depravity, gravity of left wing policies, the disorder that is enshrined into left wing policy platforms. And we say, yeah, I mean, Trump, even with his flaws, he's better, his platform is better. Okay, that's an honest position to take, even if you disagree with it. What is not the more honest position, what is the dishonest position, is to say that you are so principled, you are so moral, you are so much more righteous than everyone who voted for Donald Trump. You take your faith in the Bible so much more seriously. That's why you can't be pro maga. And yet here you are compromising in a cowardly way that almost no Christian evangelical who voted for Trump would do. And that is lying for money, for power, or because you're a coward or because you've compromised in a way that is completely unbiblical. And again, that is far more embarrassing for the faith that you proclaim, David French, than a Christian voting for Donald Trump. Okay, you have compromised your faith and abandoned what it means to be a Christian just as much as any 1-6-3rd that told them that God said that they should storm the Capitol. Yeah, hard pill to swallow. Let's learn a little bit more about Brian Riddell. This person who has been accepted in some right wing circles, who is a grown man with two children and a wife, who has declared after many years living as the man that he is, that he is a woman. So Rydell's previous roles include chief economist to Senator Rob Portman, lead research fellow on federal budget and spending policy at the Heritage Foundation. Okay, it's Riedel. Riedl. Okay, let me say that correctly. Brian Riedl at the Heritage foundation for a decade, and director of budget and spending policy for Marco Rubio's 2016 presidential campaign. Those are some conservative bona fides right there. Heritage Foundation. And February of this year, he posted a coming out announcement on Substack titled yes, my name has changed. So here's what he says. He says a variety of things. I won't read the entire article, but he says I've unmistakably known I was transgender since the age of four. Medical scans and examinations performed as a volunteer in medical studies have since confirmed my predominantly female brain biology, along with other biological characteristics that have countered my outwardly male appearance. That is just hogwash. I'm sorry, it's just hogwash. And I say this truly, sadly, this is not to be, this is not to be mean. But the, what you just saw, the picture, the juxtaposition right there, what has to be going through a man's brain to go from a handsome man. He was a handsome man, to someone to a man who is trying to dress up as a woman. Okay, this person doesn't look like a woman, does not look feminine, does not look female in any sense, looks like a man who grew out his hair, is wearing some makeup and is like playing dress up as a woman. That's a really, really troubled person. And I do have sympathy for that because I have sympathy to a degree, because in order to do that, you have to be under very heavy delusion, extremely heavy delusion, and maybe some distress. But what I don't believe is that this person has a female brain. I don't even think that that is real. Yes, men and women's brains are different. We function differently. That is based on a lot of things. It's based on gametes, it's based on, based on our hormones. This kind of differentiation starts in the womb. It gets more pronounced throughout our lives, especially after puberty. But this is someone who grew into a male, went through. Was a male, but grew into a man and went through regular puberty. And when you look at specifically this claim that you could have a brain scan that shows that you have a female brain, the studies that claim to prove this are just completely bunk. And in fact, a female fellow Manhattan Institute fellow Colin Wright, we've had him on this podcast. And Manhattan Institute writer Christina Buttons published an article in March saying that these transgender medical scans are totally flawed. They said, fatally flawed. And of course that's ironic given that Brian is actually at the Manhattan Institute. So their article Buttons and Rights, they argue this. They claim this in the article. The article states that the notion of a female brain in a male body, or vice versa, is not supported by current neuroscience studies claiming that transgender brains align more closely with their gender identity. So called often rely on small sample sizes, inconsistent methodologies, or binary classifiers that oversimplify complex brain data. The article, their article cites a 2022 study that found transgender women. So that's men who say that they're women. Their brains were still clo. Were still closer to quote, unquote cisgender men's than cisgender, quote unquote women's, despite some shifts. And these findings are not conclusive proof of a female brain. Their article also points out that brain structure can be influenced by factors like cross sex hormone therapy, which many studies fail to control for adequately. Of course, if you inject your brain with a bunch of estrogen or inject your body with a bunch of estrogen, that could have an effect on your brain still doesn't make you a woman. It doesn't make your body female. The article also highlights that these scan slash studies fail to control for a major confounding variable, supposed sexual orientation. That's also, I say supposed because that's also kind of a misnomer. Many transgender quote unquote individuals in these studies identify as homosexual. And brain differences attributed to quote, unquote gender identity may reflect these differences that are really associated with sexual orientation. And by the way, that's not me saying people are biological born with particular sexual propensity. They may or may not be. The Bible still remains clear that homosexuality is a sin. That's a different conversation that we're not having today. So this idea that brain scans can prove that you have a female brain, that's just not true. And it's not possible. Now, it could be possible that someone has true, true, true gender dysphoria. Maybe Brian truly does have gender dysphoria, where you have a persistent and insistent and consistent feeling that you were born in the wrong body. And that has to be such a distressing feeling. And we should have a lot of compassion for that. But the remedy for that is to help someone accept their biological reality. Not to get them to reject their biological reality, to try to change their outward appearance and try to force. Force everyone else to accept something that will never be true. That a man can become a woman or a woman can become a man. It's not possible to be born in the wrong body. All of us have different kinds of things. Wrong with our brain or wrong with our thinking or ways in which our thinking is incongruent with reality. But we don't try to bend reality to try to fit what our brain wrongly thinks. And yet this is a way in which people are trying to bend reality not only to how their brain thinks, or that's not only what they're trying to do, but they're trying to change law, try to change language, trying to change how we see the reality of human beings. And I'm going to fight against that as much as we should fight against this idea that two plus two can equal five. I will always fight against and adamantly reject in every single way the idea that a man can become a woman. Even if it is uncomfortable, even even if it sounds impolite, because based on that lie, Doctors for Profit are butchering people's bodies, including minors. The pain and the suffering, physical, emotional, spiritual, that these people have gone through, that have sat on this couch, detransitioners have gone through because of this lie that a man can be. She is so immense. And if we believe in God and we believe in his authority, and we believe that he is love, and we believe that his way is better, and we believe that telling the truth about people is the best thing that we can do for them because God is loving, caring and compassionate, and we know that he made them male and female, then the worst and cruelest thing that we can do to someone like Brian is lie. To them. I won't do it. I simply won't do it. David French, by calling him she is David French saying that he's nicer than God, that he knows better than God. And you don't, David, you don't. His article says. Brian's article says, to be clear, my wife and kids have known this side of me from the beginning, are 100% supportive and encouraged me to take this stat. This is news to the economic policy world, not to them. Nothing has changed at home. I don't believe you. I don't believe you. Your poor children, I think two daughters, I'm not sure their picture circulating, you know, online of his family, which of course we won't post. But you have two young children and you think that they accept this, they miss their dad, and this is sowing confusion in their lives. And you are sacrificing their stability on the altar of your desire. And that is the height of selfishness. And David French knows that, and yet he's playing along with it. This is a tragic story. Conservatives. Watch out. This kind of pernicious lie, destructive ideology is infiltrating your circles, too. And you have to be willing to stand up and say two plus two is four. There is only male, there is only female. And go back, listen to watch the episodes with Genevieve Glock to know what is really underneath this trend of grown men starting to identify as women and girls. Read that chapter of Toxic Empathy. Have compassion for the true victims of gender ideology. The girls and women's women whose spaces and teams are being infiltrated by men and boys. The minors whose bodies are being castrated and chopped up for profit because they are confused and deceived about their gender. The children whose parents are going this way and they will have trauma and confusion for the rest of their lives because of this. Those are the victims to gender ideology. Allow your compassion to be directed toward them and it will give you the gumption to continue to tell the truth. In an age of confusion and cowardice, the clearest and the most courageous thing we can do is refuse to lie. David French, refuse to lie. All right, before we get into the next story, we've got to stop for our next sponsor. But before I even tell you about the next sponsor, speaking of courage and clarity, you got to come to share the arrows. If you want courage, if you want clarity, if you want community, if you want true biblical compassion, you got to come to share the arrows. It's October 11th, Dallas, Texas. This is the largest gathering of Christian conservative women and we have an amazing lineup. We've got Francesca Battistelli, Grammy Award winning artists coming back to lead us in worship, singing together. This is my father's world with 4,000 women. Acapella last year was just a moment that I will remember forever. We've got Elisa Childers, apologist coming back. We've got Shauna Holman and Taylor Dukes. This year in a new Biblical health panel, we've got the very bold and amazing Katie Faust, Abby Halberstadt and Hillary Morgan Ferrer on a motherhood panel. My friend Ginger Duggar Volo sharing her testimony calling us to courage and clarity. And of course yours truly will be will be speaking as well. This year's Share the Arrows is brought to you by our friends at Good Ranchers. It is going to be amazing. Go to share the arrows.com to sign up. And speaking of Good Ranchers y' all, it is a great time of year to subscribe to America's only all American meat delivery service. Good Ranchers is American meat delivered right to your front door. It is what we exclusively rely on in this ducky home. They've got seed oil free chicken nuggets so good you can't find those anywhere. Better than organic chicken. We love their chicken breasts. We eat them like multiple nights a week. I said every night. But that's not true because we also eat their steak and we also eat their ground beef. It's also good having a freezer full of all American meat. It just gives me peace of mind and makes my life easier. I never have to go to the grocery store and wonder where is my meat from? What's the quality of my meat? Who am I supporting? Nope. I'm supporting a Christian family owned business that supports only American farms and ranches. They even have seafood. Go ahead and subscribe. Make your life easier and support this American industry. If you go to goodranchers.com and use my code Ali, you get $40 off goodranchers.com code Ally Foreign let's talk about Birthright citizenship. Because I've seen this going around and even in conservative circles and some of the comments that I've received when I talked about the Supreme Court wins that were announced on Friday. Some of the decisions Mahmoud v. Taylor, that was a Supreme Court case that said yes, paper parents do have the First Amendment right to opt out of things like LGBTQ curriculum in schools. That was a huge win. But another win was about birthright citizenship. But it really wasn't about birthright citizenship this particular case. It was really about these nationwide injunctions that are being put in place by judges that are stopping Trump's executive orders. And this executive order that was in the center of this case happened to be about birthright citizenship. But the comments that I've received from conservatives saying, oh, I don't know about this one, have been focused on birthright citizenship. So we'll talk about that. Uh, so the Supreme Court decided, as I said on June 27, in a case called Trump v. CASA, that federal judges cannot issue nationwide injunctions, multiple of which had previously blocked President Trump's executive order, which aims to end birthright citizenship for children of illegal or temporary immigrants. The 6, 3 decision, written by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, allows Trump's exact executive order to potentially take effect in states not currently involved in lawsuits challenging the eo, as injunctions now apply only to parties directly suing. In Amy Coney Barrett's opinion, there was a quote that was circulating that was going viral because it was suitable. So sharp. So she is contending against Justice Jackson. You'll remember she joined the Supreme Court under Biden. She wouldn't say what the definition of a woman is. A lot of people said that she was just very objectively unqualified and that she was chosen because of her race and because of her gender. This is Amy Coney Barrett basically saying, like, how in the world did this person get on the Supreme Court because of her lack of understanding of the Constitution, she says, we will not dwell on Justice Jackson's argument, which is at odds with more than two centuries worth of precedent. Two centuries, okay? Not two years, not two decades, two centuries. Not to mention the Constitution itself. We observe only this. Justice Jackson decries an imperial executive while embracing an imperial judiciary. She goes all the way back, Amy Coney Barrett does, to Marbury v. Madison Base, 1803. Okay? She's like this principle that I'm talking about, it literally goes back to one of the first Supreme Court cases, one of the most famous Supreme Court cases on which we base a lot of our case today. It's that a lot of precedent. You remember that from law school? Like, how did you even pass the bar? Of course she doesn't say that, but this is like as sharp as it gets in Supreme Court justices going after another. And I just appreciated that because that's the thing, of course, about these left wing justices. They actually don't care about the Constitution. Like, they really don't. They care about their particular ideology. They are activists. They are going to follow along whatever Democrats say that they want. And Amy Coney Barrett is like, okay, did you even read the Constitution. Do you even know what we're talking about? So let's talk about what birthright citizenship actually is, since there's a debate about this even on the right Birthright citizenship is the principle that a person automatically acquires citizenship of the country in which they are born. It grants citizenship to individuals based solely on their place of birth. And in the US it's justified through the 14th amendment. So the 14th amendment to the United States Constitution is one of the Reconstruction Amendments passed after the Civil War. It addresses things like citizenship, equal protection. It was enacted to overturn The Supreme Court, 1857, a Dred Scott v. Sanford decision. Another one of those very prominent Supreme Court cases that you probably learned about in high school or in college. Text from the 14th Amendment says all persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. However, in a January 20th executive order, Trump aimed to restrict birthright citizenship by returning to the original meaning and purpose of the fourteenth Amendment Amendment's citizenship clause. So his executive Order says this. The privilege of the United States citizenship is a priceless and profound gift. And then they go into what the 14th Amendment actually says. And the Executive Order says the provision rightly repudiated the Supreme Court of the United States. Shameful decision in Dred Scott v. Stanford. But the 14th Amendment has never been interpreted to extend citizenship universally to everyone born within the United States. The Executive Order asserts that children born in the US to parents who are either unlawfully present or legally present on temporary visas are not subject to the jurisdiction of the US and thus not entitled to automatic citizenship, and directs federal agencies to stop issuing citizenship documents to such individuals. The Supreme Court ruling did not address the constitutionality of this executive Order, just the nationwide injunctions that were put in place by judges to stop this and other executive orders. The decision empowers the Trump administration to move forward with administrative actions to implement the policy, this policy, other policies, at least temporarily in parts of the country. All right, so why is this a problem? First, we have to talk about birth tourism. There's so much that we could talk about the problems of birthright citizenship, the realities of it. We don't have time to get into all of that. But let's talk about birth tourism and chain migration. So birth tourism motivates people to enter into the US Illegally or temporarily to have children who then gain citizenship, and then that can then lead to family sponsorship. That's chain migration. So that child becomes a citizen just by being born there, it is then easier for the rest of their family to take priority in becoming legal citizens. It is totally gaming the system. There was a Senate committee finding on a Senate committee on Homeland Security finding that came out a few years ago in 2022, I believe it was authored by Senator Rob Portman in which they found that certain policies that were implemented, particularly under Barack Obama, actually exacerbated, made more accessible this birth tourism. So here's some of what they found. We'll link it in the description so you can read it for yourself. It's very long. So they found. This is findings of fact. Changes to State Department policies governing the issuance of b visas in 2015 made birth tourism more accessible. They instructed consular officers not to deny visa applicants solely because they plan to travel to the US to obtain citizenship for their child. So basically someone could come in for the express reason of doing what we just described. And people in charge were not allowed to say no based on that after 2015. This report also found after the committee began its investigation in 2020. So this committee started investigating this issue after Trump was present. The State Department amended its policies governing the issuance of B visas to prohibit travel to travel to the US solely for birth tourism. The State Department's 2020 policy change prohibiting birth tourism was a primary reason for one company called Miami Mamas to discontinue their operations. Birth tourists often make substantial cash declarations upon entry to the US make return trips to secure citizenship for numerous children, and receive significant adjustments for total hospital costs incurred. So this is like a really good deal for the people who can afford it to come over here and to have their children. Okay, let's talk about Miami Mama. This is one example. There's so many examples of this happening. Miami Mama LLC was rated by federal authorities in 2017 because of what they were up to. So again, under the Trump administration. This is according to NBC Miami. This is an example of what we're talking about. The company's website says they have been operating this is according to NBC, the company's website. They have says they have been operating in Miami since 2009 and are the first in Miami for Russian women who want to give birth to their child in the best climate with the best quality of health care. The company offers packages ranging from just under $20,000 to over $53,000 that include all the medicines and procedures that come along with childbirth, birth. They charge more for those who get C sections while assisting in finding housing, opening US bank accounts and obtaining documents such as Social Security cards, birth certificates and other documents needed for the child. The website says. Okay, this is very lucrative for a lot of people. This has become very lucrative industry. This is an article that was published at the beginning of this year by cnn. Birth tourism organizer jailed over scheme to bring pregnant Chinese women to the U.S. cNN says a California woman was sentenced Monday to more than three years in prison in a long running case over a business that helped pregnant Chinese women travel to the US to deliver babies who automatically became American citizens. This woman, Phoebe Dong was given a 41 month sentence and ordered and she was ordered immediately taken. She was taken into custody. Custody and Dong and her husband were convicted in September of conspiracy and money laundering through their company USA Happy Baby. Federal prosecutors sought more than a five year sentence for Dong and argued that she and her husband helped more than 100 pregnant Chinese women travel to the U.S. they paired or they worked with others to coach women on how to trick customs officials by flying into airports believed to be more lax while wearing loose fitting clothing to hide their pregnancies. Okay. For tens of thousands of dollars each. Defendants. The defendants helped her new. Okay, the defendant. Sorry, this typo in this article. Defendant helped her numerous customers deceive U.S. authorities and buy U.S. citizenship for their children. The U.S. happy Baby case was part of a broader probe into businesses that helped Chinese women travel to give birth in California. The operator of another business is believed to have fled to China while another was sentenced in 2019 to 10 months in prison. Okay, so this is already sketchy. Parts of this is already illegal. The birth tourism part, however, it hasn't mattered until the Trump administration is saying that it mattered when it comes to citizenship for the kids, even if it was illegal, even if they were risking all of this, like their baby still gets the citizenship, they still may get the benefits of chain migration. So that's a huge issue that people are gaming the system. People are making money off of this and they are getting all the benefits of citizenship when other people have been waiting in line for a very long time to get citizenship and do it the right way. There are many countries that do not have birthright citizenship. Most countries don't have the birthright citizenship that the United States has. And people are acting like, progressives are acting like, oh my gosh, this is so fascist. This is so horrible. This is so picketed that we wouldn't have birthright citizenship. Okay. Most countries don't. I see some people saying, oh, this is so sad and bigoted and progressives are just so angry at this. This is fascist. Okay. Most countries don't have this. Most countries don't have this. And we'll get into that in a second. But let me pause and tell you about our next sponsor first, it's Carly Jean Los Angeles, y' all. I am wearing some new CJLA clothes that I have. I've got this white blouse, and I wore it to a speaking engagement just the other day. And a lot of y' all were asking me about this if we can go to the wide shot. You can see my jeans. I'm obsessed with these jeans. These are my new favorite jeans. I love all of my denim from cgla. They've got so much good stuff right now, y' all. Super cute. If you go to carlyjean losangeles.com and you use my code Ali B, you'll get 20 off your order. I mean, just get you some staples. Get you, like six really good staples from cjla. You will be able to wear them throughout the year, throughout different seasons of life, whether you're pregnant or postpartum or neither of those things. I still have CJLA stuff that I got five years ago that is still looking so fresh. And I love Carly, her family, they're the real deal. And they're just great clothes. And plus their basics line, all made in the U.S. which is awesome. Go to Carly Jean Los Angeles.com use code Ali B. That's Carly Jean Los Angeles.com code Ali B. Okay, countries with restricted birthright citizenship. I'll list them. But first, let me say the US And Canada are the only first world countries that have unrestricted birthright citizenship. So. So there are other countries, I think 33 other countries that also have unconditional birthright citizenship. So if you are born there, you become a citizen automatically. They are mostly like in South America. Um, and so. And there are some other ones in different parts of the world, too. But US, Canada, only other Western civilization countries that allow this unconditional birthright citizenship. I can't even read you all of the countries that have highly restricted birthright citizenship or no real birthright citizenship at all. Because it's most countries. But I will list you some of them. The countries that many progressives hail as so forward thinking and so much more compassionate than the United States, y' all. When it comes to immigration, there is not a country more compassionate, if you want to call it that, more open than the U.S. okay? So I don't want to hear the complaints about how we are finally enforcing immigration law. Every country has a right and responsibility to do that. Not saying we should be cruel, but it's also not always going to look nice and easy either. And that's how other countries do it as well. I mean, Mexico has way stricter immigration policies than we do. You don't have the same rights as an immigrant in Mexico as the native born people have. It is so different than the United States. Okay, here are the countries that have extremely conditional and restricted birthright citizenship. It's conditional. I can't even call it birthright citizenship because it is conditional. Your citizenship, if you're born in these countries, on your parent status, on their permanent residency, whether they have citizenship in other countries. So France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, Ukraine, the United Kingdom, China, India, Iran, Israel, Japan, so many others. Egypt, Morocco, South Africa, Australia, New Zealand, extremely conditional, lots of conditions, lots of qualifications, lots of restrictions. America, because of what I think is a wrong interpretation of the 14th Amendment, is completely liberal and open when it comes to birthright citizenship. Other countries are a lot more strict and a lot, a lot stricter and a lot more sane, a lot saner when it comes to their immigration policies, especially with birth rate citizenship. So let's not act like this is extremist, this is normal. It's the same thing that progressives do when it comes to abortion. Like some people will say, oh yeah, I just maybe don't think abortion should be legal after 16 weeks. Like when we know they can feel pain maybe. And you'll get the progressives and the Planned Parenthood lobby all dressed in their red robes saying, this is the Handmaid's Tale. We're going back to the 1950s. This is so radical and extreme. And it's like, well, 16 weeks is still later than most of Europe. France, I'm pretty Sure, has a 12 week limit on abortion. Guys, if we're more liberal than France or Germany on anything, we're going in the wrong direction. Here's also an ironic point in all of this. Democrats suddenly care for unborn babies when it comes to birthright citizenship. Within hours of the published decision from the Supreme Court, the plaintiffs CASA of Maryland, it's an immigration advocacy organization, along with Asylum Seeker Advocacy Project and the Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection, filed to convert the case into a class action lawsuit. So they asked Judge Deborah Boardman to ask the U.S. district Court in Maryland to officially recognize a class of children born or to be born to immigrant parents who could be denied citizenship under the executive order under this lawsuit. And, uh, even children in the womb would be included. So suddenly when it comes to accomplishing their immigration goals. Because, remember, Democrats are thinking long game. If they can change the demographics of the country, if they can make, they think America less conservative, evangelical, white, then they will secure progressive victory forevermore. So this is very important to them. So when it comes to achieving their political ends, suddenly babies inside the womb are not just human beings, but they also have rights. They have full rights, constitutional rights. And it's so interesting that they're using the 14th amendment to try to say that babies inside the womb are afforded the same rights as everyone else. That's the argument that we make. That's the argument that conservative pro lifers make, that the equal protection clause actually does extend to babies inside the womb and therefore they should be granted the same constitutional rights that you and I have, that they should be given the foremost right, which is the right to life, the right not to be murdered. That is a proper interpretation of the 14th Amendment, though. An improper interpretation of the 14th Amendment is to say that this grants unconditional citizenship to everyone who was born here. I'm not arguing with their position that babies inside the womb should be afforded all rights, including rights in the 14th Amendment. I'm saying the right to unconditional citizen citizenship because of where you were born is not in the 14th Amendment. So the hypocrisy there is just. It's just insane. It's just insane. The cognitive dissonance is crazy. Okay, we've got to talk a little bit more about what is going on in immigration because I want to talk about this story that you've probably seen circulating that y' all have been asking me about and just fact check it quickly. But before we get into that, let me go ahead and tell you about our last sponsor. It's Adele Natural Cosmetics. I love Adele, y' all. They are my mainstay when it comes to my skin care. I try a lot of different products, but I never, ever change. My essential moisturizing cleanser, my essential moisturizing spray, I use that every day. Also, when I'm not in the studio, I use their moisturizing foundation, which I love. I love their bronzing stick, their blush, it's all so good. I love that it's completely natural, it's holistic, all made from nature. It's not fake or synthetic. It doesn't have any of those endocrine disruptors that you have to worry about with so much in the cosmetic industry today. And it really works. Plus, this is a Christian family owned company. They've got a Bible verse on all of their packaging. I've met them. Arlene and her family are awesome, completely unashamed of their biblical and pro life values. They know that beauty comes from within, but that God has also given us these beautiful tools in nature to enhance the beauty that he has given us. And that's why I love Adele and use it every day. Go to adelenaturalcosmetics.com use code ALLY for 25% off your first time purchase. That's adelenaturalcosmetics dot com code ALLY okay, so here's the story that you've probably seen. A Guatemalan illegal alien named Iris Diana Monterosso Lemus came into the spotlight when the outlet Nashville Banner painted her as a victim of ICE mistreatment in a story published on May 27. She was detained while pregnant. She lost her baby, according to the Banner, due to allegedly being denied medical care. The Department of Homeland Security, though, claims that this is a lie. Here's what the Nashville Banner said. After she was arrested by ice, she ended up at the Richwood Correctional center in Louisiana, where she asked for medical help for days and she lost her midterm pregnancy. She said, they didn't give me medical attention nowhere. Not in Louisiana, not in Alabama. I was in Alabama too, sleeping on the floor. She said she was given 12 pills to take daily, though the Banner was unable to independently verify this. She took them for two days before stopping, convinced something was wrong. I told them to just send me back to Guatemala because I was pregnant and I wasn't getting the medical attention I needed. I called ice. Ice I called and sent texts, but still nothing. They told me I had to wait for my flight. Can you imagine? We've got Representative Jaya Powell. She is a Democrat representative from Washington. She said a pregnant woman lost her baby after ICE refused to give her prenatal care. She begged for help and was denied. She was fed food full of cockroaches. She was forced to sleep on the floor. This is absolutely disgusting and we should all be outraged. Now I will say if that is true, it is disgusting and we should be outraged. I would have absolutely no problem saying that just because I support, in general deportations, the sovereignty of our country, the enforcement of immigration law, which does include deportations, and that's the only way that we make sure that citizenship actually means something and can counts, that doesn't mean that I am going to agree with every individual treatment of every single person. And because human beings are flawed, systems can be flawed as well. And they can be simple and they can do wrong things and So I would have no problem saying this is horrifying. I'm so sorry that this happened and we need to investigate to make sure that nothing like this happens again. We've got all kinds of posts saying this, this is Santa, Santa Ana updates. This has a ton of engagement on social media. Pregnant woman in ICE custody loses baby. We've got different Christian influencers who are talking about this, of course, questioning the validity, the integrity of the pro life movement because we support deportations and don't have any problem with this. And of course, I think some people on the right will even see this as an opportunity to say, yeah, see, I have a problem with this. Just to try to like maintain some kind of like middle of the road position. But whenever I see something from the left, I'm always, I'm gonna stop before I say anything. Even if initially it does seem horrifying. I'm gonna wait for more facts to come out. And there has been a counter narrative. I, I don't know for sure if what the DHS is saying is true, but here's what the Department of homeland security, Trisha McLaughlin. What she has to say, she says absolutely false. She this woman had full medical prenatal care. We have documentation to show it. Iris, 37, is a citizen of Guatemala who has been arrested multiple times for child abuse and is wanted on an active warrant for homicide. So this is what the DHS has to say. They rebutted this on their government website. They say she received prenatal care, including an ultrasound in obgyn, an ob GYN visit, dental care and medication. She was also admitted to a hospital and saw multiple nurses. They said she received prenatal care, including a fetal Doppler ultrasound. As soon as she identified the distress on April 29th, ICE provided immediate medical assistance. DHS says I sent her to a hospital immediately to receive medical care. They say she was not required to sleep on the floor. She had a bed in her cell. They also say all ICE New Orleans detainees are provided appropriate dietitian cleared menus daily per ICE performance based National Detention Standards. We have no record of a grievance filed by a detainee because she said that she was mistreated and mocked by the guards. They say that she was arrested twice for child abuse and neglect with the Loudoun County Sheriff's Office. I don't understand why she's not in prison then. But she also has an active warrant for homicide in Guatemala. Yikes. Okay, so this is what the DHS is. This is what DHS is saying. This is why she was being detained. This is why she was being deported, because she is a dangerous woman according to the dhs. Now you can say, well, I don't believe the dhs. It's just propaganda. We haven't seen the documentation that has been talked about and maybe they can't because of privacy reasons. But I would just say, I would warn you, before you latch on to a story that is meant to grab onto your heart and pull your empathy in the direction of progressive policy, to ask yourself, but is this true? And typically it's wise just to wait, just to see, okay, is this story actually right or is there something that they're not telling us here? And it seems to me like there are at least some a countervailing set of facts here. I don't know what's true. I do believe that all people, no matter their immigrant status, should be treated with dignity, should be treated with care, especially unborn children. That all these people are made in the image of God and they should be treated with respect. But that doesn't mean that they shouldn't be detained and they shouldn't be deported because if they are here illegally, they should. And I am for any dignified and kinder way that we can do that. If the left would like to give me some policy suggestions, then I am totally willing to hear them out. But if the suggestion is we shouldn't be detaining and deporting people at all, then I just can't get on board with that. I can't get on board with that and we're not going to be able to have a good conversation about it. Okay, final thing. I just want to play you one thing. A BBC presenter, Martine Croxol, she went viral after she was brave enough to do this on air. Sat 1. London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine has released research which says that nearly 600 heat related deaths are expected in the UK. Malcolm Mistry, who was involved in the research, says that the aged, pregnant people, women and those with pre existing health conditions need to take precautions. So she kind of rolled her eyes there. She said women. And this was published by Pink News, which is a pro LGBTQ outlet. And all over the comments were so mad at her. I'm sure she's received a lot of heat for that. She posted a huge thank you to everyone who has chosen to follow me. And so far I don't think that she's been punished for that, but just be praying for her. Give her a high five on social media if you can. It's Maxine Cruxol, or. Sorry, I said Maxine. It's Martine. Martine. BBC is her handle on X. And just that small act of. Not that line of refusing to tell a lie and insisting on telling the truth, that means a lot. That gives a lot of people courage. So high five to you, Martine. Keep going. That brings it full circle. If there's nothing else that you can do today to advance the truth, which there's always something, but one of the bravest things you can do is refuse to lie. All right, that's all we've got time for today. We'll be back here on Wednesday. Sam.