The title of this blog post is a paraphrase from Kristen Waggoner. Kristen is the CEO, president and lead lawyer for the Alliance Defending Freedom, a law firm that champions First Amendment rights up to the Supreme Court. Kristen argues many of these cases herself. She has defended the rights of free speech and religious liberty of Christians against the secular left many times.

Here’s her latest article in the Daily Signal:

[Vice President Kamala] Harris has consistently undermined the freedoms guaranteed by the First Amendment. That should alarm every American.

As I told Wall Street Journal columnist William McGurn: “Throughout her career as a public official, Kamala Harris has long used government power to try to coerce people of faith to violate their consciences, especially regarding abortion and gender ideology.”

[…]The Biden-Harris Treasury Department conspired with major banks to flag transactions of ordinary citizens making purchases at Dick’s Sporting Goods, Bass Pro Shops, and Cabela’s, and buying “religious texts” like Bibles, under the guise of identifying potential “domestic terrorists.”

The Justice Department under the Biden-Harris administration similarly went after parents who spoke up at school board meetings in an infamous 2021 memo, equating their advocacy on behalf of their kids with “harassment, intimidation, and threats of violence.”

[…]In a speech to the NAACP, she said that social media platforms “have a responsibility to help fight against this threat to our democracy.”

Who would Harris classify as a “threat to our democracy”? Presumably, the same people her administration labeled as potential “domestic terrorists”; namely, concerned parents, nonprofit charitable organizations, and guys who like to camp, among others.

What I like about Kristen’s column is that she recalled all of the times that the Biden-Harris administration has gone after people’s first amendment rights.

Here is another case, the “Twitter Files”, which were internal documents released by Elon Musk that showed how the Biden-Harris administration pressured social media companies to censor factual news stories that made their regime look bad, such as the Hunter Biden laptop story.

Kristen writes:

As the explosive “Twitter Files” documented, the Biden-Harris administration indeed colluded with social media companies to suppress ideas and voices that didn’t conform to the “official” narrative around several issues of public interest that required free and open debate.

And the Biden-Harris response to getting caught was to try to destroy Elon Musk:

An Oct. 22 investigative report by independent journalists Matt Taibbi and Paul D. Thacker uncovered a plot by a group of foreign advisers to the vice president to “Kill Musk’s Twitter” and to solicit the help of Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., one of the leading proponents of online speech suppression.

As I’ve reported on this blog, Harris does not want to grant conscience exemptions to Christian medical professionals that would allow them to opt out of performing abortions. She wants pro-life Christians to be forced to perform abortions, in violation of their religious liberty. And she also colluded with abortion providers and raided the homes of pro-life whistleblowers.

More:

During an interview with NBC, when asked whether she supported a “religious exemption” for medical professionals who choose not to participate in abortion, Harris responded, “I don’t think we should be making concessions when we’re talking about a fundamental freedom to make decisions about your own body.”

[…]As a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Harris badgered at least three judicial nominees for having been members of the respected Catholic nonprofit Knights of Columbus, which has more than 2 million members. Harris may be unaware, but the Constitution expressly prohibits religious tests for holding public office.

Legislatively, then-Sen. Harris sponsored the Do No Harm Act, a bill that would gut the Religious Freedom Restoration Act—one of the most important federal safeguards for religious freedom—primarily for the benefit of the abortion industry.

She also cosponsored the Equality Act, which would wipe out freedom of conscience and free speech by giving the federal government the power to police and punish the beliefs of disfavored Americans who have not submitted to the new sexual orthodoxy.

As attorney general of California, Harris celebrated the passage of the Reproductive FACT Act, which effectively required pro-life pregnancy resource centers to advertise for abortionists, and defended it in court on more than one occasion.

In one case, A Woman’s Friend Pregnancy Resource Clinic v. Harris, a federal court upheld the law, which would have forced pregnancy help centers to comply with a bizarre array of coerced-speech mandates.

[…]In 2015, journalist David Daleiden exposed Planned Parenthood’s grisly practice of selling the body parts of aborted babies in a series of undercover videos. Did Harris, as attorney general, investigate Planned Parenthood for trafficking fetal organs?

No. She went after Daleiden in 2016—instead of her abortion industry allies and donors—raiding his home and seizing his equipment. And eight years later, his legal troubles are far from over. Daleiden still faces eight felony charges in an unprecedented case.

Now, I know a lot of wealthy establishment “Christians” who are in favor of Kamala Harris. When I ask them about these stories, they have never heard of any of them. Not a single one of them. When I ask them to name one of the Christian business owners who have been sued by LGBT activists, they don’t know about any of those cases, either. And that’s not surprising, because many of these wealthy establishment “Christians” have no Christian life plan. So, they are not authentic enough about their faith that they feel threatened in any way by secular left fascism. But what about you? Are you a Bible-believing Christian? If you are, then I hope enough evidence has been presented here to cause you to vote, and to make sure that your friends and family vote, too. ESPECIALLY if you are in one of these battleground states, where the races are all tied, or nearly tied. Remember, if it’s not close, they can’t cheat.

I try to keep an eye out for any podcasts that look really good, and when I saw one of our former Knight and Rose Show guests (Dr. Luskin) being interviewed by another former Knight and Rose Show guest (Dr. Frank Turek) on a very interesting topic: the shortcomings of the Darwinian theory of origins.  In this post, you’ll find a YouTube video, a link to the MP3 file, and an outline of topics.

In the episode, they discuss the change of heart that some evolutionists are having as the evidence turns against their theory. We talked about the evidence from junk DNA with Dr. Luskin, but he talks about a bunch of different topics in this episode with Dr. Turek.

Here’s the outline from the Cross Examined blog:

• What are some key differences between micro and macroevolution?
• What did later research reveal about the Galápagos Island finches and how does it compare to Darwin’s findings?
• What is epigenetics and how does it relate to the case for Intelligent Design?
• Why are some biologists hesitant to openly share their doubts about Neo-Darwinism, while others are increasingly vocal?
• What’s the difference between Darwinism and Neo-Darwinism?
• What are the strongest arguments for a common ancestor?
• Are non-coding regions of the human genome really “junk DNA”?
• What about the God of the Gaps argument?
• Are proponents of Intelligent Design religiously motivated?
• What are the 4 basic L.I.F.E. problems found within macroevolutionary theory?

You can download the MP3 file here.

Here’s the YouTube video:

We’re trying to interview good scholars on the origins debate for the Knight and Rose Show, and so far we’ve had:

• Guillermo Gonzalez: Earth is Designed for Discovery
• Casey Luskin: Debunking the Myth of Junk DNA
• Chemist Fazale Rana Investigates the Origin of Life

And here is the book where you can learn about all of these interesting topics!

The Comprehensive Guide to Science and Faith: Exploring the Ultimate Questions About Life and the Cosmos

I have the audio book and the paperback versions.

Stay tuned, because we have a guest scheduled to discuss another topic in the design vs evolution debate. That episode will probably be out in January, though. We got the best guest that you could possibly get on this topic! And we have a couple more topics and guests in mind for later.

I’ve been listening to a podcast from Daily Signal about media bias, and how censoring the news helped Biden to win in 2020. For example, the suppression of the Hunter Biden laptop story by the corporate news media swayed enough votes to deny Trump the presidency. People like to base their decisions on evidence, but what happens when evidence is suppressed by the secular left?

Well, I found a very shocking example of the secular left suppressing evidence that disagrees with their worldview. This story was reported in the far-left New York Times, of all places.

The New York Post reported on it:

A prominent doctor and trans rights advocate admitted she deliberately withheld publication of a $10 million taxpayer-funded study on the effect of puberty blockers on American children — after finding no evidence that they improve patients’ mental health.

Dr. Johanna Olson-Kennedy told the New York Times that she believes the study would be “weaponized” by critics of transgender care for kids, and that the research could one day be used in court to argue “we shouldn’t use blockers.”

Critics — including one of Olson-Kennedy’s fellow researchers on the study — said the decision flies in the face of research standards and deprives the public of “really important” science in a field where Americans remain firmly divided.

For the National Institutes of Health-funded study, researchers chose 95 kids — who had an average age of 11 — and gave them puberty-blocking drugs starting in 2015. The treatments are meant to delay the onset of bodily changes like the development of breasts or the deepening of the voice.

After following up with the youths for two years, the treatments did not improve the state of their mental health…

I thought this was interesting, about the evidence-withholder lady:

Olson-Kennedy, the outlet points out, is one of the country’s leading advocates for providing gender-affirming care to adolescents, and regularly provides expert testimony in legal challenges to state bans on such procedures, which have taken root in more than 20 states.

When asked by the Times why the results have not been made public after nine years, she said, “I do not want our work to be weaponized,” adding, “It has to be exactly on point, clear and concise. And that takes time.”

She then flat-out admitted she was afraid the lack of mental health improvements borne out by the study could one day be used in court to argue “we shouldn’t use blockers.”

Secular leftists are always telling me how driven by “evidence” they are. Maybe that’s because the only evidence they allow is evidence that confirms what they already want to believe! I bet they feel very superior to the people who disagree with them, though. They will just say “well, we are guided by evidence, and our opponents just believe whatever they see on social media”. Uh huh.

Now, I know what the pro-trans people will say to this. They will say that “all the problems that result from a child trying to transform from his/her birth sex into the opposite sex with chemicals and surgeries are all caused by social disapproval”. They really believe that IF ONLY people would celebrate the delusions of children, then everything would work out perfectly.