Michael Knowles (27:10)
Do you see the irony here, too? The reason that they took these kids in. These are foster parents. These aren't parents who are adopting newborn babies. There are about 34 couples who want to adopt a newborn baby. For every newborn baby put up for adoption, demand vastly outstrips supply. We're talking about the market, as we now do, I guess, for newborn babies. For foster parents, younger kids, teenagers who are in orphanages and state institutions, who then go to live with supply vastly outstrips demand. Okay, so this couple says, we are Christian, and because of our Christian faith, we feel called to do what most people don't want to do, and that is take in these kids who need a home. We're going to do that. And the state of Massachusetts came in and said, okay, that's great, but you're not allowed to be Christian anymore. Yeah, you can do that. But if you do this, if you do this thing that your faith has impelled you to do, you have to stop being Christian or we're going to take your kids away because it's not possible to be Christian and affirm the LGBT identity. You can't do it. I know there are all sorts of flavors of religion that identify as Christian. They call themselves Christian. But the church's teaching on this subject in particular is pretty clear. Going back about 2,000 years, you just can't have it. Can't do it. So they say, well, we're not gonna renounce our faith for anything. But it's particularly crazy to renounce our faith in order to do the thing that our faith has impelled us to do. Massachusetts says, okay, too bad, and we'll go find some gay couple to give the kids to. Sorry, we're not going to allow the kids to be raised Christian. That's what the state of Massachusetts is saying. You cannot, we will not allow foster children to be raised in a Christian household, which is obviously religious discrimination. And beyond Religious discrimination. It's obviously wrong. All sorts of ideas that call themselves religion, some true, some false. But in this case, it's so obviously wrong. You have to raise a kid in an LGBT elementop household or affirming household. Can't raise them in a Christian household. That's crazy. What this reveals, though, is the absurdity of the left's argument when they accuse us of trying to enforce our morality on others. Why do you care? Why do you care? That's what they always say. I actually really enjoyed going on the show. I was on Adam Friedland's show. He was this left wing comedian, very. We had a great conversation. You can catch it on his YouTube channel. But one of the moments where the interview got kind of spicy is when he was really hitting me on the trans stuff. And he said, well, why do you care? Why do you care? I don't care about this. I said, oh, great. If you don't care, then cut it out. The left was the aggressor on this issue. They're the ones who forced the guys in the girls bathrooms. They're the ones who forced the rainbow flags all over the public square. And so we responded to that. But if you're saying you don't care, oh, great, wonderful. Then I guess we're in agreement. You don't care. So give it up. Shut up about the LGBT stuff. Get the stupid rainbow flags out of the streets. Get the men out of the girls bathroom. Great. You don't care, cuz you don't care. We do care about morality, so good. Then I guess we're in agreement. They say, well, no. I mean, no. I mean, like when I say why do we care? I mean, Christians need to shut up is basically what the left is saying. They don't really mean it. What do you care about? It's funny. They ended up. Adam actually cut out part of the interview where we were talking about the transgender ideology. I said, do you think it's true? He said, well, I just don't care. I said, I didn't ask if you care. I ask if you think it's true. And they cut that part out of the interview because obviously people care. You should care. And also, I think most people on the left know that it isn't true. They know that the transgender thing is fake. They know a lot of the LGBT stuff is fake, but they. I don't know. The most charitable read I can give is they think it's nice. They think it's nice to lie to people. I think that's sincerely what most of them think. And so they say, stop. Stop making us answer questions of truth and falsehood. Just. Can't you just be nice? Why do you care? It's like, well, you care a lot. And I think the truth is good and will set you free. And I think falsehood is bad. I think lying is bad, and I think it's disrespectful and I think it leads you into misery. But one thing I think we should all be able to agree on is we all care. We all care. And there will be some kind of moral framework for the law. So it's either gonna be ours or it's gonna be yours. And it doesn't even have to feel that personal because that's kind of the way the left views it is. Just factions vying for dominance over the other. That's not how I think about morality. I think the only way that we can come to, I don't know, a peaceful resolution for the law is to think about the law as something objective that can be arrived at through reason. That is the premise of self government. That is what our founding fathers thought and our framers thought. So that's where this question about truth and falsehood comes from. Is it true? Let me just ask you especially. There are plenty of liberals and left wingers who watch the show. Let me just ask you. Do you really think. When we're talking about trans or whether we're talking about marriage, do you really think. Do you really think men and women are exactly the same, so similar that a union of two men is the exact same as the union of two women is the exact same as the union of a man and a woman? Do you really think that? Do you really. I just don't care. I just want people to do whatever they. That's not what I asked. It's not what I asked. What do you think? It's just us gals? It's just you and me. Come on. It's just you and me. What do you think? You know it's not. You know it's not. Well, it doesn't mean that I want to enforce it in the lunch. Hold on. You know it's not true. You know it's a lie. You think it's some kind of noble lie. You think it's some kind of comforting lie, but it's a lie nonetheless. Let's go further. Do you think it's good to enshrine lies into our laws? What do you think? I just. I don't care. I don't. What do you think? No, probably not. Right? Probably not. Well, what's the worst that could go wrong? Well, okay, here's one example. Christian parents who take in these orphans who no one else wants to take in, they're told they can't anymore because the state will discriminate against them and force them to stop being Christian if they want to keep their kids. That's like, one example of how things go wrong when you enshrine lies into law. Women getting raped in bathrooms by men who are allowed to go in there, that's another thing that goes wrong. When we enshrine lies into laws. Girls losing their school scholarships and their trophies, when we allow men to compete against them in sports and we pretend they're all the same, that's another thing that goes wrong. A mass increase in anxiety, depression and suicidality as we encourage the LGBT element of the identity with a special focus on the T. That's another thing that goes wrong. Suicide rates remaining practically the same before and after the transgender procedures that destroy people's bodies. That's another thing that. Need I go on? Need I go on? Because we could be here all day. I think most people know the truth. I think most people know even if they don't want to admit it. Like my left wing comedian friend on that show in the part that was cut out. I know most people don't want to admit it. I think most people know that a man can't really be a woman. And most people know that there's something a little bit odd about a couple of fellas or a couple of chicks. It's a little bit weird, right? It's just say, not exactly the same as a man and a woman. I think most people know that. The only question is, will you have the courage of your convictions to actually say the thing that you know to be true and further, to behave that way in public and in politics and put that into the law, put truth into the law instead of lies. Will you have the courage to do that? That's the question. Here's a little warning. If your answer to that part is no, the other people will have the courage to put lies into the law. The other people will have the courage to try to force you to lie. The other people will have the courage, a dubious kind of courage, but a courage nonetheless, to force you to renounce your faith. If you want to perform an act of charity, they will do it. So someone's going to do it. Is it gonna be you on the side of the good stuff and the true stuff, or is it gonna be the other side. But it's inevitable that there's gonna be some moral framework in the law because it's gonna be inevitable that people care because you're human beings and we're social creatures and we're inclined to live in society. So we care. That's just, that's how it works. Speaking of moral issues and the rainbow stuff, even the liberal media admitting some good news from the Supreme Court on so called this is a really loaded phrase. Conversion therapy. October is packed with new releases on Daily Wire plus we're talking new series, new documentaries and the premiere of Friendly Fire. Join me Ben Shapiro, Matt Walsh, Andrew Klavan. Unscripted, unfiltered, no moderators, nothing off limits Live this Thursday night at 7pm Eastern. Plus special appearances from Isabel Brown. A visit from Jeremy with your first look at the Pendragon cycle. Do not miss a moment. Join now. Get 40% off new annual membership with code FALL40. This month there's more happening on DailyWire plus than ever before. Do not miss it. Go to DailyWire.com and join today. My favorite comment on Friday is from the Drummers Workshop. Norm's Music. Wow. Of course. How many? We should do an analysis. What percentage of my favorite comments? Cause I don't really look at the names generally. I just pick my favorite comment. What percentage of them are from this one commenter. Among the zillions of comments on these videos, this one, the Drummers Workshop music who says in 1492, Columbus sailed the ocean blue. In 2025 Trump should receive the Nobel Prize. That's a near rhyme. It's at least Asinen. That's a good one. NPR is admitting that conservatives are probably about to win a big case at the Supreme Court. Remember I told you a week or two ago I said the Supreme Court is hearing this case on so called conversion therapy. There's this Christian therapist in Colorado, it's always Colorado. For some reason she's there and patients come to her and they say I have these unwanted sexual urges and intrusive thoughts and desires and stuff and I want ways of coping with them. And she's not allowed to help them because there's a ban on so called conversion therapy. And what's weird about this is if a patient went in and said, hey, I'm straight but I wanna be gay, I don't know, they'd probably put it differently. They'd say, hey, they'd probably phrase it in this really liberal way. They'd say like, hey, I'm in a bourgeois and Oppressive romantic construct. And I wanna explore my sexuality and my identity and, I don't know, whatever. That's what they say. But the bottom line would be if a patient walked into a shrink and said, I wanna go from straight to gay, there would be nothing wrong with that. If I'll put it in even more concrete terms, if a boy walked into the shrink and said, I want to be a girl, I think I am a girl, there would be nothing wrong with the shrink saying, okay, Sally, well, let's explore that. What color dresses do you like? But if patients walked in and wanted to go the other way, that would be illegal. The psychologist could lose his or her license, which means that there's no ban on conversion therapy. Boy can walk into a shrink and say, I want to be a girl. And the shrink not only can convert him, but is actually kind of obligated to convert him so that conversion therapy is totally fine. It's just the other kind of conversion. Converting in the other direction you're not allowed to do. Which is obviously viewpoint discrimination. And even NPR is admitting this. Even npr, covering the oral arguments in the Supreme Court case, says Supreme Court seems highly doubtful of limits on conversion therapy for minors. So just the highlights here. This evangelical therapist in Colorado says that her free speech rights are being violated because she's not allowed to give advice in one direction, but she is in the other direction. Justice Alito, very solid, maybe the most solid guy on the court, says this looks like blatant viewpoint discrimination. As we just said, that was the conservative read. I think if you're even semi literate, you have to recognize it's obviously viewpoint discrimination. Now, what is viewpoint discrimination? It's what it sounds like. It's when you favor, you permit one viewpoint to the exclusion of other viewpoints in public life, which according to our present jurisprudence, you're not allowed to do. There's actually a deeper discussion about that and what viewpoint discrimination even means. And I take it on a lot in my book Speechless Controlling Words, Controlling Minds, which. Where's my thank you? Which you can get wherever great books are sold. But in any case, according to the law as it is now, you're not allowed to have viewpoint discrimination. And Alito says this looks like viewpoint discrimination. Ketanji Jackson, who is the Supreme Court justice who was befuddled by Senator Blackburn's question, what is a woman during her confirmation hearing, she said, I'm not a biologist. She laughed. She said, I don't know what a woman is, just two degrees from Harvard. Ketanji Jackson disagreed With Alito, I'm not sure she was able to form a coherent sentence or argument, but she disagreed with him in any case, and she's on the side of the ban. According to the reporting. However, this isn't just a conservatives on one side, liberals on the other side issue. Even Justice Elena Kagan, who was dean of Harvard Law School, who is a huge lib, but is intelligent, at least she seems to be on the side of Alito here and on the side of the evangelical therapist who says this is viewpoint discrimination. She said, quote, let's just assume that we're in a normal free speech land rather than in this kind of doctor land. And if a doctor says, I know you identify as gay and I'm going to help you accept that, and another doctor says, I know you identify as gay and I'm going to help you change that, and one of those is permissible and the other is not. That seems like viewpoint discrimination, almost the exact scenario that I just mentioned. The reason I love this story is one, it's good for the law, it's good for a conservative culture, it's good for the rights of therapists, it's good for the rights of patients, for that matter. But also, you know how much I hate to say I told you so. I called this one years ago, years ago when all, even the conservatives were saying, well, I certainly oppose a conversion therapy. They thought it was like Mike Pence hooking you up with electrodes to, you know, a car battery or something. I don't know, whatever the libs made us think it was. And I thought about even the phrase for a second. I said, wait, wait, this is obviously a polemical, stupid slogan because all therapy is conversion therapy. Because the whole point of therapy, maybe not how it's actually practiced, but the whole point in principle is that you go in to change your ideas and behavior. You say, I have ideas and behavior that are distressing me and I'm gonna go see this psychologist to change them to convert from one set of ideas and behavior to another. So if you were actually to outlaw so called conversion therapy, you would be outlawing the practice of clinical psychology, which is why it's simply a political slogan. It's just a polemical phrase. And it looks like that phrase has outrun its usefulness. Steven Pinker at Harvard, he has this phrase that he coined the euphemism treadmill, where he says, we have all of these terms that we use, these happy, clappy slogans, not merely to soften harsh truths like you call an Old woman, you call her a lady of a certain age. It's not a lie. It's just kind of softening a harsh truth. Call her an old hag or something. But. But with the left, they use these euphemisms to lie about the truth. So they'll say a criminal is a justice involved person. That's the opposite of what it is. They'll call a man a trans woman. That's not softening a truth. That's just lying. Right. That's the opposite of it. The same thing here, conversion therapy. This is trying. It's not a euphemism. It's sort of the opposite of a euphemism. It's a disaster dysphemism. It's trying to make a reality seem worse than it actually is. But it's run out because eventually people figure out what the score is. They say, hold on. An undocumented dreamer, future American, whatever. They're actually. It's just like a face. Tattooed gangster. It's an illegal alien. Oh. Huh. And then you have to come up with a new euphemism. Well, they're gonna have to come up with a new dysphemism here. They're gonna have to come up with a new scare slogan. Because I think people realize that the jig is up now. Speaking of dubious laws, I love this. I cannot go before I get to this one. Gavin Newsom, Patrick Bateman himself over there in California, wants to be the next Democrat nominee for president. Newsom is trying. He's doing this schizophrenia act. Speaking of psychological conditions, he's doing this schizophrenia act where on the one hand, he wants to seem like the moderate, he's gonna be the Bill Clinton figure in this race, as the left has gone, so woke up. And so he's gonna try to be friends with Charlie Kirk, he's gonna try to be friends with Steve Bannon. He's going to reach across the aisle and have conversations. That's one side. Then on the other side, he's going to, through his press office, justify the potential assassination of Stephen Miller by calling him the same phrase that Charlie Kirk's killer called him. You're a fascist. On the other hand, he's gonna be the mayor of San Francisco who performs so called gay marriages before it's legal. He's gonna be this super lib. So what is he? Is he the moderate? Is he the super lib? He's trying to have it both ways because he knows he can't win the primary if he's not a super Lib. But he can't win the general if he's not a moderate at this point cuz the left has gone so far and the right has taken over the common sense. Sometimes political radicals actually can win general elections. But for the left right now that can't happen cuz they've ceded so much of the culture, so much of the center ground, so many of the demographics that they used to rely on. Okay, so what is Newsom doing now? He's done the moderate thing a little bit. Now he's trying to bolster his left wing bo a few days. He has signed a law creating an office of Reparations for Slavery in California. A couple years ago he got this ball rolling. There were going to be reparations for slavery. Now mind you, there is currently no program for reparations for slavery, but there is now an office to distribute the reparations that don't exist for the program that does not exist. That's not even the funniest part. The funniest part is I don't know how many of you are history buffs. California was admitted to the Union as a free state. There was never slavery in the state of California. Furthermore, California, go dig back to your ninth grade history. California was admitted to the Union in the Compromise of 1850. The admission of California to the Union was one of the chief causes of the Civil War, which was fought not entirely, but to a significant degree to abolish slavery over the question of slavery. If there is one place on earth, not just in America, on earth, that should not feel any historical guilt or responsibility for slavery, it is the state of California. So of course they lead the country in establishing an office for Reparations. It just. You couldn't make it up. A Hollywood screenwriter in California could not make it up. The either for Newsom, the profound ignorance that it would take to do this, or the profound cynicism and low estimation of his own constituents. Which is worse? I don't know. I don't know. But ignorance is a cause of slavery. Ignorance and lack of discipline, those are the two causes of true slavery. Because the truth makes you free. We were talking about that earlier. Okay, today's Music Monday. The rest of the show continues now. You do not want to miss it. Become a member. Use Code knowleskandawlas at checkout for two months free on all annual plans. And Doug Limu and I always tell you to customize your car insurance and save hundreds with Liberty Mutual. But now we want you to feel it. Cue the emu music. Limu Save yourself money today. Increase your wealth, customize and save. We say that may have been too much feeling. Only pay for what you need at libertymutual Com Savings Very unwritten by Liberty Mutual Insurance Company and affiliates. Excludes Massachusetts.
