Ep. 1110 skewers Cambridge Dictionary’s redefined terms as political weapons, mocking Hamlet Mendacity PhD’s absurd justifications while framing transgender activism as a threat to children and religion. The episode contrasts Trump’s defiance of "censorship cartels" with Mike Pence’s measured warnings about military debt and cultural battles—like Iowa’s gender-treatment laws—while exposing Boise State professor Scott Yenner’s Title IX witch hunt. A mailbag offers cold pragmatism: disclose bipolar disorder, adopt instead of risk hereditary trauma, and attend weddings but skip ceremonies clashing with faith. The takeaway? Resistance is futile; adapt or be erased. [Automatically generated summary]
The Cambridge Dictionary has changed the definition of the word woman to include, quote, an adult who lives and identifies as female, though they may have been said to have a different sex at birth, unquote.
Now, I know what you're thinking.
You're thinking, oh, Clavin, you sensual sultan of satirical something or other beginning with S. How is it possible that you could come quot the jiggly puff of rectangular anesthesia now that words no longer mean anything?
But no, I am not garaging a hippopotamus.
The Cambridge Dictionary has actually changed the definitions of man and woman to reflect the new reality that reality no longer reflects reality, so words should no longer catapult what Gorgonzola Oriental cat massaged.
The editor of the Cambridge Dictionary, Hamlet Mendacity PhD, defended the change of definitions at the annual homosexual pedophile twerking competition of the American Teachers Union.
In an impassioned speech given to a worried-looking eight-year-old boy, Dr. Mendacity said, quote, the time has come for words to be set free of the prison of their meanings so they can joyously run unencumbered through the rainbow fields of absolute nonsense, dancing with unicorns under pink clouds of glorious morning if unicorns are defined as satanic deviance and glorious morning is defined as civilization destroying moral corruption.
Then at last, we will have full tolerance of evil, which the Cambridge Dictionary now defines as good.
Now come on little boy, let's get out of here and find someplace quiet, unquote.
The new edition of the dictionary also contains other revised definitions.
For instance, the word dictionary is now defined as a spineless capitulation to elite social pressure.
The word definition is defined as a meaningless string of absurdities constructed at random by influential grifters.
And the phrase, emperor's new clothes, is defined as clothes.
Dr. Mendacity said he hoped these changes would serve as an aid to political resistance, which is now defined as slavish obedience to the whims and machinations of the powerful.
Although some people, like women and men, objected to the definitional changes because they undermined mental health and moral behavior by dismissing the inescapable gender identity conferred upon humans by the only body they will ever have and thus spat in the face of our creator,
a strategy that has a long history of working out badly, both for the civilizations that are no longer with us and the individuals whose despairing screams from the depth of eternal hellfire can sometimes be heard in the still of night as a forewarning of your own doom if you happen to be the editor of the Cambridge Dictionary, others thought the new definitions were great.
Trans activist Raymond Scuzz, whose pronouns are uh-oh and that pervert over there, says the definition will help put an end to hate speech because words won't mean anything, so who cares what you say?
Scuzz discussed the matter during a break from Drag Queen's Story Hour, where he was reading the new children's book, Billy Gets a Nice Piece of Candy from a Friendly Stranger.
Scuzz said, quote, look, some people are trans.
Get over it.
If a person wants to be called a woman and use female pronouns, what's the big deal?
Why do these haters care so much that we want to force them to lie in service of a deviant ideology that seeks to destroy the natural basis of human existence in order to replace the family with Marxist tyranny?
I mean, if a starving anorexic decided to identify as fat, would you go around saying, no, you're thin, you have to eat or you'll die?
Or if someone wanted to identify as a bird, would you say no, if you jump off that building flapping your arms, you'll plummet to your death?
Of course not.
That would be fat birdophobic, and it would stigmatize mental illness by suggesting someone's insane delusion was out of touch with reality, which the Cambridge Dictionary now defines as a unicorn under pink clouds of glorious morning, unquote.
Leftists and other groomers say they're eager to see the next edition of the dictionary, which they feel will finally oblong the street lamp of toenail in order to flowerpot the bridal of Ontario and thus make it much easier to spew their nonsensical and destructive crap.
Trigger warning, I'm Andrew Clavin, and this is the Andrew Clavin Show.
I'm the hunky donkey.
Life is tickety boo.
Birds are ringing, also singing hunky-dunky-dunky.
Ring Doorbell Alerts00:02:38
Ship-shaped ipsy-topsy, the world is a bitty zing.
It's a wonderful day.
Hoorah, hooray!
It makes me want to sing.
Oh, hoorah, hooray.
Oh, hooray, hurrah.
All right, we are back laughing our way through Ragnarok.
You can watch me, by the way, now on YouTube playing the God of War Ragnarok.
They just put that up.
And today we've got a lot to talk about.
We're going to talk about the Respect for Marriage Act, or as we call it here, the No Respect for Marriage Act.
A great I thought comical move by Donald Trump yesterday.
And Mike Pence, the former vice president, will be here to talk about his new book, So Help Me God, which is by Mike Pence.
So I guess that's why he'll be talking about it.
While you're online buying a strange habit of mine for your secret Santas and other gift-giving people and yourself, you can pick up So Help Me God by Mike Pence.
Also, you want to subscribe to YouTube so you get all that exclusive content.
We are putting out a lot of good content that you don't get anywhere else.
And if you ring that little bell, you'll suddenly hear ringing in your ears and then voices, and finally you'll be carted away.
But you will also get exclusive content.
And if you leave a comment and the comment is absolutely morally disgusting, we will include it here as being a perfect fit for our content.
Tom Sizemore today says, I've noticed in one commercial, Andrew Clavin says that he never sleeps.
And in another commercial, he says that he loves coffee.
I feel there could be a connection there.
Huh?
Shut up, Tom.
All right, the holidays are coming.
You may be going to see your family.
They may be coming to see you, which means they may find themselves or you may find yourself away from home more often than not.
That's why the Daily Wire has decided to team up with Ring, with Ring security products.
You can rest easy knowing that your home and family are safe when you're not there.
The Ring doorbell notifies you when guests or packages arrive.
Ring's indoor cameras let you keep an eye on kids and pets while you're away.
Ring alarm will alert you of any motion detection while the house is empty.
Plus, if you add smart lighting around your home, you can turn lights on or off while you're away.
Ring's home security products don't just help keep your home and family safe.
They make perfect gifts for everyone on your list.
Head to ring.com slash collections slash offers to find out how you can live a little more stress-free this season with a ring product that's right for you.
That's ring.com slash collections slash offers.
It is a good thing.
It will keep your home safe while you're away.
Serenity And Wisdom00:07:40
There's a lovely little Stephen King novella called The Langoliers, in which a group of plane passengers find themselves trapped in a time warp and they discover that there are these creatures called Langoliers.
They're just big teeth mouths with teeth who clean up time by devouring the past.
Now, that story conveys a piece of wisdom that I have acquired over a long life.
And I'm going to tell it to you now.
And you younger listeners are going to have to take it on faith.
And you should take it on faith because it will help you to live a joyful life, especially if you're conservative and care about politics, which I assume you are.
Here's the piece of wisdom.
The past is past.
There is no going back.
The door to the past is not just closed and locked.
It's gone.
The Langoliers have devoured it.
There's nothing there.
And if you lost something precious back in the past, you cannot ever retrieve it.
It is gone forever.
Now, I say this, and I've said this to people in person, so I know that some of you are thinking, oh, wait, here's an exception, or you're thinking, yes, but no buts, there are no buts, there are no exceptions.
You lose what you lose in the past, and it never comes back.
The Langoliers are real.
There's no going back.
And the more you accept that, the more joyful you are going to be.
Now, what does this mean culturally and politically?
Does it mean, for instance, if marriage and family become extinct or if faith in God goes out of the world or if manhood and femininity cease to be cherished values, as we're all afraid of, that means you can never restore them?
No, you definitely can restore them, but you have to rebuild them in a new way for a new age, namely the age you're in.
You cannot go back and retrieve them from where you were.
You can have memories, you can have traditions, those guide you.
So when you rebuild the new thing that you're going to build, it can have the nature of the old thing kind of inherent in it, but it's still going to be new.
It's not going to be what it was before.
The image for this, of course, as the image for all wisdom, is in the Bible, right?
It's in when Adam and Eve are chased out of paradise.
When they're chased out of the Garden of Eden, God puts up cherubim above the gate with a whirling sword so they can't get back in.
In order to get back to paradise, they have to go forward into sin, into history, into bloodshed, war, all the things that history includes, until they reach the time when a new heaven and a new earth come and the old heaven and earth have passed away.
And to get into that kingdom, the kingdom of heaven, Jesus says you have to become like a little child, but you can't become, and I will tell you this from experience, you cannot become the little child you were who is the child of ignorance.
You have to become wise enough to be childlike.
And it takes a lot of wisdom to become childlike.
And you can't, and when, and the paradise you recover is not going to be the same paradise.
It's not going to be the garden of innocence.
It's going to be the garden of experience.
You will have a new paradise where you know all the things that history has taught you.
See, why am I telling you this?
I'm telling you this because a lot of conservatives spend a lot of time trying to bring back the good old days and it's a complete waste of time and they lament things that happened that are not going away.
Birth control, you hear conservatives say birth control, it's increased promiscuity.
It has.
It's increased disease, the abuse of women, and it seems a paradox, but it's not.
It's also increased the number of illegitimate children.
The internet has created porn and information crisis.
It's taken a toll on civility and privacy, children's safety.
It's raised our anxiety levels.
And of course, illegal immigrants bring crime and drugs and they erode American traditions.
These things aren't going away.
We are not going to deport.
I keep telling my friends as they get so angry at me.
We're not going to deport, however, 20 million illegal immigrants.
It's not going to happen.
We're going to have to find some way to bring them in.
But there's no point pretending these things are going to change and go back to the way they were.
And all of them have potentially good effects.
I mean, birth control obviously makes it so that a married couple can have sex and have pleasure in each other's bodies without having more children than they can afford.
And the internet, you know, obviously puts all this information in your hand and it makes life more interesting and fun.
Illegals are bad because they're illegal, but immigration has traditionally refreshed America with new ideas and new attitudes.
So here's what happens.
The left uses their cultural influence to convince people that the evil effects of change, the sexual immorality and the authoritarian control of information on the internet and the destruction of borders and American culture, all of those things, they try to convince you that those are the things that can't be gotten rid of.
They try to convince you that the bad things that they like are here to stay.
The game is over.
There's no sense fighting anymore.
Anyone who even tries to fight that change is out of date.
He's extreme.
He's hateful.
He can be canceled.
He can be censored.
He can be drowned out.
And the reason conservatives are such idiots about the culture is they fight back by saying, no, you know, we want to bring back, you know, we want to get rid of all the immigrants.
We want to get rid of birth control and remember that nobody has sex until they're married.
We want to get rid of all these things that you can't get rid of.
And while they're complaining about that, the left wins the culture and the thing that they were trying to convince you of that the bad things are here to stay becomes true.
Now, we can't return to, for instance, sexual morality enforced by the natural consequences of pregnancy and disease because we have a lot of medicine and we have birth control that's not going back.
So what you have to do is you have to start making arguments.
You have to start making reasoned arguments and creating cultural propaganda that shows you, and people will have experience, that shows you that promiscuity is bad for you.
It hurts you.
You know, it's not the life.
It's not the happy life.
You have to live the life that you want other people to live.
You have to be, as they used to say, the change that you want to see, right?
Because the old world is not coming back.
The Langoliers have devoured it.
Only a new world can be made.
And this is true of Christianity, too.
You cannot preach Christianity like you're living in the 50s.
You can't preach it like you're living in the Middle Ages.
You have to preach it to a world where, you know, we know about quarks, where we can talk to each other around the world, where we live longer.
We're not as worried about death when we're young as people used to be because they died so young.
All of those things you have to adjust to.
The old serenity prayer.
You know the serenity prayer that says you want the wisdom to accept what you can't change and change what you can.
Conservatives have to say that prayer every day and create a realistic future culture that maintains the best values of the past in new ways.
And I'll show you specifically what I mean.
I find one of the hardest things to get around Christmas time are stocking stuffers.
But Black Rifle Coffee Company is helping you knock out your holiday shopping with a ton of awesome new products this year, designed for folks who love country and coffee.
That's me.
You can shop brewing gear, thermoses, mugs, and apparel for 10% off with promo code Clavin.
Black Rifle sources the most exotic roasts from around the globe.
All coffee is roasted here in the U.S. by veteran-led teams of coffee experts.
Every purchase you make with Black Rifle helps support veteran and first responder causes.
DW Plus kitchens are stocked with Black Rifle coffee, and yours can be too.
Go to BlackRifleCoffee.com and use promo code Clavin for 10% off coffee, coffee gear, apparel, or when you sign up for a new coffee club subscription.
That would make a nice gift for me, by the way.
That's blackriflecoffee.com with promo code Clavin for 10% off.
Black Rifle Coffee supporting veterans and America's coffee.
The whole trick to building a political culture, a culture that speaks into the political world, is trying to understand, figuring out, is the serenity prayer.
It's the wisdom to know what you can't change and the courage to change what you can.
It's knowing what the Langeliers have eaten and what is still in play.
They're Not Going Back In The Closet00:13:11
So this week, President and venal houseplant Joe Biden signed into law the Destruction of Marriage Act, which they call the Respect for Marriage Act.
Here he is in 2006.
This is 10 years after he voted for the Defense of Marriage Act, which defined marriage as a heterosexual institution.
This is the Clinton law.
And he was fighting on Meet the Press.
He was saying why we don't need a constitutional amendment to define marriage as a heterosexual institution.
The world's going to Hades in a handbasket.
We are desperately concerned about the circumstance relating to avian flu.
We don't have enough vaccines.
We don't have enough police officers.
And we're going to debate the next three weeks, I'm told.
Gay marriage, a flag amendment, and God only knows what else.
I can't believe the American people can't see through this.
We already have a law, the Defense of Marriage Act, where we've all voted, not where I voted and others said, look, marriage is between a man and a woman, and states must respect that.
Nobody's violated that law.
There's been no challenge to that law.
Why do we need a constitutional amendment?
Marriage is between a man and a woman.
What's the game going on here?
What is the game going on here?
Same game Obama played, right?
They lie, and then they close the trap, and instantaneously they tell you if you disagree with them, if you say what they said 10 years ago, you're a hateful person.
Here is Biden at the signing of this Respect for Marriage Act.
This is cut four.
Folks.
Racism.
Anti-Semitism, homophobia, transphobia.
They're all connected.
But the antidote to hate is love.
This law and the love it defends strike a blow against hate in all its forms.
And that's why this law matters to every single American, no matter who you are or who you love.
See, suddenly, suddenly, you can't go back.
It's done.
And now it's just a matter of hate and love, folks.
It's just hate fighting love.
Let's listen to a little bit more of that speech.
It's cut two.
H-A-T-E.
It was with this left hand that old brother Cain struck the blow that laid his brother low.
L-O-V-E.
You see these fingers, dear hearts?
These fingers have veins that run straight to the soul of man.
The right hand, friends, the hand of love.
Now watch, and I'll show you the story of life.
These fingers, dear hearts, is always a war and a tugging one against the other.
Now watch them.
Old brother left hand.
Left hand hates a fighting.
And it looks like love's a goner.
But wait a minute.
Wait a minute.
Dog loves a winning.
Yes, sir.
It's love that won.
And old left-hand hate is down for the count.
So that wasn't the president of the United States.
That was Robert Mitchum playing the psychopathic murderer in Night of the Hunter.
But as you see, they're almost indistinguishable.
In Night of the Hunter, Mitchum is gulling a bunch of simple country folks with simplistic moral nonsense.
And in this case, obviously, Biden is gulling simple country folks like Mitt Romney, then other Republicans who were stupid enough to sign this bill, which does not provide sufficient, it does give a nod to religious objections, but we know they want to destroy the right of religious people to object, right?
We know this.
You know, they tell us, oh, well, it's right there in the law, but isn't that what Joe Biden said before?
It's right.
We have the law.
We don't need any protections.
We already know the left wants to destroy the rights of religious people to disagree with their agenda because of the way they behave when Colorado attacks cake bakers and website makers.
All of the left signs on and calls them hateful because not because they won't serve gay people, which they do, but because they will not say what they don't believe and what they think is wrong in the sight of God.
We know that they are on the warpath with this.
They're progressive in the same sense of emphysema and cancer.
That's why they're called progressives because they progress just like emphysema and cancer.
Here is Biden telling you what he means to accomplish.
Cut five.
We need to challenge the hundreds of callous, cynical laws introduced in the states targeting transgender children, terrifying families, and criminalizing doctors who give children the care they need.
We have to protect these children so they know they are loved and we will stand up for them and say they can seek for themselves.
So the ultimate target of the people is the destruction of religious rights and the grooming and sexualization and legal butchery of children, of confused children.
He's telling you this.
He is saying it.
I don't care what words he uses to say it, but it's clear what he means.
It's clear what they're cheering for.
And this is somewhere where, you know, Ben and I see a lot of the same things in the world, but sometimes our values are different.
And this is the one thing where I disagree with Ben when he says this is not sexual, it's political, it's sexual.
They're sexually grooming children because they think it helps their political agenda.
It's not a right-wing conspiracy, obviously.
This signing, you know, at the White House was this guy, Marty Cummings, who is an anti-police activist drag queen.
He endorses performing highly sexualized routines for children.
He said that kids are out to sing and basically perform oral sex.
Those are the words he used.
And later he said he didn't mean kids, but he's pretty clearly lying.
I mean, who would believe that a drag queen wasn't what he appeared to be, right?
And let's remember this.
This is important because drag queens are central.
You know, I read the book by Judith Butler, Gender Trouble.
It's fake grifter nonsense, written in gobbledygook, so it's hard to parse the nonsense, but it talks about the difference between men and women.
I don't think it ever mentions motherhood at any point.
You know, the word female, by the way, I mean, maybe the people at Cambridge Dictionary don't know this.
The word female derives from roots meaning the one who suckles, the one who feeds a baby.
So they've never mentioned any of that, but they mentioned drag queens.
Judith Butler talks about drag queens.
It's central to her arguments because she explores how drag queens erase the gender divide, which is socially constructed, blah, It's total grifter garbage.
So the drag queens represent gender as a social construct, an idea that seeks to erase maternal instinct and female nature because they are the core of the family.
And the family is the core of tradition and tradition is the core of freedom and all the things that we brought with us into this world and all of those things, not freedom and tradition, but the maternal instinct and female nature.
You know, the New York Times is running stories now.
There's no such thing as maternal instinct.
Every mammal, every mammal has maternal instinct.
You can see it.
You can see the way animals behave with their young.
It's utterly ridiculous that only the human female is lacking in this regard.
So the way we know the target is grooming is always because they want to make it illegal to say so.
They want to make it illegal to call them groomers.
Here is Katie Porter, a Democrat congresswoman from Orange County, California, cuts seven.
This allegation of groomer and pedophile, it is alleging that a person is criminal somehow and engaged in criminal acts merely because of their identity, their sexual orientation, their gender identity.
What?
He's just lying.
And this kind of ticks me off, too, because, you know, this is the new thing when they say, oh, groomer is an anti-gay slur.
We're not attacking gay people.
We're attacking people who groom children for sex, who sexualize children, who bring this stuff into our schools and say basically, they basically say that parents don't have the right to object and shouldn't be told about it.
And they have the right, you know, because they make it as if the kid has this terrible need to, you know, change sex.
This is, it's absurd.
It is psychologically absurd.
It has no basis in science.
It has no basis in reality.
Something like 99% of children who sometimes toy with the idea of changing sex, most of them end up being gay, but they don't end up cutting up their bodies, which is an atrocity because it doesn't solve any problems.
You know, it's just our nice way of saying stay away from our children, you sick, evil lowlifes, right?
The idea here, the idea is always to convince you, obviously, that you are doing something wrong because the fight is over.
And the way they use the word extreme, have you ever noticed this?
They come in and they bring in sexual pornography and homosexual pornography into kindergarten.
And you say, don't do that.
And you say, you're banning books.
These extreme positions, this extreme position.
Obviously, it's a moderate position that children should be educated in their culture by their parents and the teachers are there to serve their parents, not to override them.
So they're trying to teach you that the Langoliers have eaten the past.
All the things that you cherished are gone, and anybody who's standing there is just standing in a place that's going to be devoured by the Langoliers.
They're going.
But it's all untrue.
It's a brutal, bullying use of the media and the culture, which they own.
They own it because we don't understand how to use it, and we don't understand how to talk to the future.
We won't let go of things that actually are gone, right?
I mean, for instance, gay people are not going back in the closet.
I mean, you can preach whatever you want, and you can say whatever you want.
They're not going back in the closet.
And you know that I'm sympathetic to this and have been all my life.
People say it's because of my son.
It is not because of my son.
This is the way I have felt all my life because I'm an artist and I've worked with a lot of gay people and I know so many of them are good.
Remember, these activists are not normal people, right?
These activists are the worst of the worst.
I'll try and talk about that a little later if I have time, that the activists do not represent all of the people they say they represent.
Most gay people are highly productive, highly creative, decent human beings who are contributing to our society.
You can say to them, totally reasonably in a friendly way, you should be celibate.
You can say that to them.
There are organizations like Courage, which encourages Catholic gay people to not have sex, to live without that.
And those people who feel that that is what God wants them to do should do it.
But romantic love is one of the great consolations for the tragedy of life.
I mean, life has one ending.
It's only one end to the story of life.
And so you want to have the consolation of love and romance.
And if gay people are going to have that, all I think is we should treat them well.
So they're not going back into the closet.
We can say anything we want about that, but they're not.
So what the left has done is they've used the reasonable position.
Let honest gay people live their lives as they see fit and leave them alone, which people basically did in this country anyway, even though the law didn't always support it.
But leave them alone.
It is good, I think, if they are going to have relationships to let them have long-term relationships protected by law.
That is a good thing.
We can argue about the word marriage and that's fine.
But still, I think this was a right thing.
So what the left has done is they have used the cloak of decency and tolerance to bring in evil.
The evil of grooming, the evil of transgendering confused children who don't know any better, the evil of this assault on religion.
And remember, the reason they hate religion so much is because religion churches are the one thing powerful enough to fight back against the government.
Hard for a person alone to fight back against the government.
It really is, but it's not hard when the church can organize and speak as one and be protected by the Constitution.
That's what they're trying to get rid of.
Now, you can say, one of the things that conservatives say when they get angry at this is it's a slippery slope.
Once you let gay people come out of the closet, once you let them live in peace and have relationships that are protected by law, it's a slippery slope.
The problem with this is everything is a slippery slope.
You know, when you give women the vote, people said at the time, women need more care than men and they're more anxious than men, so they're going to vote for bigger government.
That is exactly what happened.
That is exactly true.
Women do vote for bigger government.
There would be no Democrat presidents if women didn't have the vote.
But women should have the vote.
And so what you have to do is you have to make the point out loud.
Women don't look to government to don't let government destroy the family and then enslave you.
The family actually keeps you free.
The feminists are telling you it oppresses you, but it actually keeps them free.
You've got to do something new.
You have to do something new.
Women have a new right.
It's not going away, so you have to come with a new message for a new world.
Now that you have this right, let us talk to you about how you use it.
And you say it's mansplaining, as I always say, I will continue mansplaining until they girl understand.
It's complex.
It's difficult to fight for the future.
It is difficult.
We are the underdogs.
We are the counterculture.
We're the rebels.
We're the resistance.
We are the actual resistance.
That's why they call themselves that, you know, because it's part of their cultural job to convince us that they are the future.
They're the resistance.
They're going to win the future.
But it's untrue.
They're the establishment.
They are the establishment.
They own every major cultural institution except this one, except the one you are listening to or watching right this minute.
The Resistance Myth00:02:47
They own all the other big ones and maybe Fox News for a couple more years while Rupert is alive.
You know, this is the thing.
They own so much of it.
So we're the underdogs.
We're fighting a corrupt culture created by wealth and security.
Wealth and security convinces people that it postpones the consequences of bad behavior so they think the consequences will never come.
People think, oh, free love, this is great.
You know, if I get sick, I'll use penicillin.
I'll use contraception so no one will get pregnant and it's great only you wind up on antidepressants and you have no children and you're miserable and the population collapses.
But other than that, it was great.
So they're living in a delusion.
They're living in the delusion caused by the success of Free America.
Still, we have to fight back.
We have to get past anger.
We have to get past nostalgia.
Nostalgia is sweet, but it's useless.
We have to implant our values in the world as it is for the simple reason is there's no going back to the way it was.
You know, a will is very important, especially for me because Shapiro is out back digging my grave just in expectation.
But a will determines how your financial assets are dispersed as well as your personal property.
It ensures that your end-of-life decisions are honored when you're unable to see them through.
For parents, a will determines who will raise your children should you and your spouse die before they're of age.
Without a will, the state will make this decision for you.
If you're just starting out and you don't have thousands of dollars to spend on an attorney, but you want to make sure your savings, your belongings, and your family are all protected, you have to create your will at epicwill.com today.
Epic Will bundles your last will, living will, health care, power of attorney, HIPAA release, and durable financial power of attorney.
It only costs $119 for a single person to create a will.
When you use promo code Clavin, you'll save 10%.
Go to epicwill.com and use promo code Clavin to save 10% on Epic Will's complete will package.
That's epicwill.com, promo code Clavin.
I know a lot of people don't like to spell to talk about the will, but you do have to talk about how to spell Clavin.
It's K-L-A-V-A-N.
So this is the thing that I love about Donald Trump.
I speak freely about the things that I don't like about Donald Trump, and I know that makes some people angry, but I can only tell you the truth.
I mean, you can't pay me to lie, and I wouldn't have any value if I did.
But one of the things I truly love about Donald Trump, and one of the things that I think is most important about him, is that whether intellectually or instinctively, he understands this thing about the misuse of culture and how it's used to bully people and how it's used to tell them that when they tell them their country is racist and their God stinks and their values stink and their marriage stinks and their heterosexuality and their whiteness stinks and all this.
Why Free Speech Matters00:10:19
When they tell people all those things, the point is that the Langoliers have eaten the world you love and there's no going back to it and now you're an outsider.
That's what they're trying to tell you.
That's why they won't make a movie that praises the right.
They won't let anything get past.
And if anything does get passed, they do everything they can to silence it and cancel it.
That's why, and Trump fought back about this.
You know, it's part of the difference between the values of Trump voters and the values of people who hate Trump is sophistication.
And I don't mean that in a positive way.
I mean simply the fact that liberals, people who live in cities tend to be more liberal and they tend to be more liberal about sex and they tend to be more used to freaky people.
It's not that people who live in the country don't understand eccentricity.
It's just they handle it in a much different way, where people in the city make a virtue out of tolerance, even if they're tolerating something that's intolerable, right?
And a lot of my sophisticated right-wing friends would make fun of me for supporting Trump, and they would make fun of people who would say, well, at least he fights.
And I would say, damn right, damn right.
When did you ever stand up?
I would say this to people who, famous people who write for famous places, I would say, when did you ever stand up for those people in the middle of the country who have no voice and who have been told for 50, 60 years that they stink?
And Trump does it.
So this week, he did this.
I thought this was good.
I've heard a lot of people on the right disagreeing with me, but still, I'm pretty sure I'm right.
This week, Barry Weiss released more Twitter information showing how the lefties at Twitter won the fight to ban Trump permanently.
The president, the sitting president of the United States, they banned him.
They silenced the sitting president of the United States, even though everyone there acknowledged that he hadn't violated the Twitter rules.
They acknowledged that, but they just hated him so much.
They were so afraid of him that they closed him down.
They banned him because he undermines their abuse of the culture.
If they don't have a monopoly on the culture, if they can silence people, then their tactics start to fall apart.
So all this comes out about how they silenced him.
So Trump promoed a major announcement.
I have a major announcement.
We need a superhero.
And then he released these idiotic Trump virtual playing cards for like $100 or something like that.
It was just utterly ridiculous.
And everyone laughed at him.
And then he released a program for dealing with online censorship.
Here's what he said.
There's cut eight.
In recent weeks, bombshell reports have confirmed that a sinister group of deep state bureaucrats, Silicon Valley tyrants, left-wing activists, and depraved corporate news media have been conspiring to manipulate and silence the American people.
They have collaborated to suppress vital information on everything from elections to public health.
The censorship cartel must be dismantled and destroyed, and it must happen immediately.
Now, that's good language.
It's good smart things.
His plan that he lays out, he's going to purge the censors out of government.
He wants to prosecute some of them.
Excellent, excellent stuff.
And that language that he's using, it's fearless language.
It's the language.
It's the voice of people who don't have a voice, a voice of people who feel that they've been shut down, that their culture has been destroyed, and that they've been demonized when they used to be accepted as the good kind of standard normal people.
They just want to live their lives, and they've been attacked and attacked.
And that's that voice.
I want to say, just to be fair, DeSantis has already passed a law in Florida that does some of this stuff, that protects people in some of these ways.
But DeSantis got a lot of what he does from Trump.
I think that maybe it's time, as I've said before, I think maybe it's time for a new generation.
I think that would be a good thing.
But still, still, that is what people love.
And what I love about Trump, I love it when he talks like that.
Nobody deserves to be kicked down the street like our press.
It's one of the most corrupt, aside from the FBI and the CIA, it's one of the most corrupt organizations in the country.
I hate it when people say Trump is playing 3D chess, because a lot of times I think he's just made mistakes and people are covering it for him.
This time, I think he was playing 3D chess.
I think the thing with the playing cards was a troll.
I think it was meant.
He knew people would laugh at him.
He knew they would ridicule him.
Everyone would be looking at him, and then he'd release this thing, and it would get out to people whether they liked it or not.
And I think that that was a really smart thing to do.
Meanwhile, meanwhile, Elon Musk continues the work of God that he's doing over Twitter.
He suspended, I think it was, I don't know, seven journalists, including a Washington Post and a New York Times reporter and a CNN reporter.
And he accused them of doxing his jet and putting his child in danger.
And the idea was that they had released the place that his jet was going to be and thereby made it possible for Antifa, which has been trailing after him or trying to trail after him, to possibly hurt him.
So there was an online collection discussion group of journalists.
They're discussing this.
And Elon has the great idea to join them.
This is on Twitter.
They're on Twitter discussing the fact that seven journalists have been banned on Twitter.
And Elon joins them.
And this is what he says, 16.
Showing real-time information about somebody's location is inappropriate.
And I think everyone on this call would not like that to be done to them.
And there's not going to be any distinction in the future between journalists, so-called journalists, and regular people.
Everyone's going to be treated the same.
They're not special because you're a journalist.
You're a Twitter.
You're just your citizen.
So no special treatment.
Your dogs should get suspended.
End of story.
So what follows, I didn't include the next little bit because it's just going on too long.
He leaves.
And before anybody realizes he's gone, a woman there asks a question basically saying, but this is the Washington Post and the New York Times, as if nobody has figured out that they're just leftists flogging the government policies, that they're part of this enormous, enormous agreement among corporations, the government, the academy, the media, and the news media.
The New York Times is not a journalistic operation.
I mean, it's a former newspaper, basically, that is pushing for more leftism and pushing for more government and running things, running CIA-planted information as if it were authoritative by anonymous sources.
So they have no, basically, right.
They have no rights whatsoever.
So was this right or was it wrong?
Because there's a lot of people on the right saying, okay, some people on the right are saying, well, they're getting a taste of their own medicine.
That, of course, is beyond true.
I mean, what the left tries to do is they try to define normal speech as hateful.
So if I say you're grooming children, meaning that you are going to children with sexual content that they are not ready for and that you have no right to present to them, you are grooming them to the kind of sexuality that you want when you have no right to do it.
When I say that, they say, well, you're endangering my life.
But when you actually dox somebody, especially if it's a conservative, and say, this is the house where Brett Kavanaugh, the Supreme Court justice, lives, that's fine.
That's free speech.
That's not a problem, right?
So they define danger as disagreeing with them.
You know, you're trying to kill us.
You're trying to kill us.
But they define actually endangering people as free speech.
So they're getting a taste of their own medicine.
But that is not a good plan, right?
I don't think that's, you know, people say, oh, you're weak if you don't want to fight the same fight they do.
But no, if you're destroying free speech, free speech is still getting destroyed, right?
What difference does it make who destroys free speech if free speech gets destroyed?
And once there's no side standing up for free speech, who will stand up for it?
Nobody wants free speech for the other guy.
Nobody wants it.
That's why we have it.
That's why we guarantee it.
Nobody wants free speech for the other guy.
So if we, the right, don't stand up for free speech, who will?
So did he do the right thing or did he not?
First of all, I'm a free speech absolutist.
But what I mean by that is that I mean you should be able to express any ideas you want as strongly as you want.
There are plenty of things that I don't think belong in, that can be regulated and can be silenced.
Threats, right?
You have no right to threaten somebody.
You have no right to incite violence against somebody.
It's not inciting violence to say homosexuality, for instance, is a sin.
That's not inciting violence.
That's a perfectly rational, decent opinion that you can back up with reasoned argument.
That's not inciting violence.
Kill that guy because he's homosexual.
That's inciting violence.
You should not be able to do that.
You shouldn't be able to threaten people.
You know, there's a nice government you have here.
Too bad if you lose it.
Shouldn't be able to do that sort of thing.
Personally, I don't care if they censor foul language, four-letter words.
I don't care if they censor that.
I don't care.
There are certain slurs that we all accept are slurs.
And I don't care if they say on Twitter, you cannot use those slurs.
That's fine.
That is fine with me.
What really is important is that you can express ideas in the angriest, meanest way you want.
That is, I think, just an important thing that you have to be able to do.
And that's what we're trying to defend.
I think in this case, I think that doxing can be banned.
I think you can banned people for doxing.
And as you know, I don't go for this thing like it's a private company.
They can do anything they want.
No, they should be regulated to enforce free speech.
They have too much power, too much sway.
They're the place for too much of the speech in America.
They can be regulated to enforce free speech rules.
But I think you could get rid of doxing.
I don't think this was quite doxing.
You know, I mean, I think that like anybody can track where a plane is going to be.
You have to file a flight plan if it's a private jet.
So I don't think this was quite doxing.
I think that actually was public material and they should be allowed to do it.
So maybe he went too far here, but he's feeling his way.
He is in favor of free speech.
I don't think it's fair to say, oh, you know, he's just censoring in the other direction.
But it's like the end of the world because it happened to a left-wing group of journalists.
Matt Walsh Debate00:03:15
But that's who they are.
They're not just journalists.
They're not the mainstream press.
The mainstream press is an insult that we use to define them because there's nothing mainstream about them.
But this is why the fight for information primacy is so intense, why it's important that we have a 50% share of the culture, a 50% share of the information highways, because we do not want them to be able to convince people that the world they love was gone, the values they cherish are gone, the things that they know are valuable and important are gone.
That's what they try to do.
They try to convince you that the fight is over, but the fight is not over.
Even if we have to rebuild American tradition in a new way, in a new age, that fight is worth taking.
The Langel years are real, but the future is real too, and that's where the victory is going to be won.
Now, I want to pause.
I'm running out of time in this segment.
I just want to pause to say if you were watching backstage, you know I got in a debate with Matt Walsh because I lost a bet to him.
And I said I'd let him choose for 72 hours what the picture was on my social media.
And he chose that guy.
What's his name?
Sam Brinton, right?
The whatever he is, the bisexual, transgender, whatever, who was just arrested for stealing luggage.
And I said that was going too far.
And since Walsh never pays his bets, he never pays his bets, and he always finds some way to wiggle out of them.
That's why he's really Matt Welsh.
I think we should call him Matt Welsh.
That's what I think.
That I wasn't going to do it.
But then I reconsidered.
I thought, just because he's Matt Welsh, I am still Andrew Clavin, a man of his word.
And so I have decided that I'm going to put a picture of Sam Brinton up on my social media for 72 hours.
And it's this picture.
I'm going to put this picture up so that Sam Britton will be there.
If you're not watching, but you're just listening.
It's a picture of Sam Britton's head, which some of you may notice is indistinguishable.
Just the top of his head is indistinguishable from the top of my head.
And the reason I'm doing this is because it's exactly what Walsh would do if he lost a bet to me.
And so that will be up there on my social media for 72 hours.
And if something should happen to Matt Walsh in that time, He's been a little depressed and been talking about suicide, but it has nothing to do with me.
All right, we'll be back.
All right, Christmases are coming.
But before you hang up the stockings with care and settle in for a long winter's nap, I highly suggest you take advantage of our final sale of the year.
Right now, you can save 30% on new Daily Wire Plus annual memberships and gift memberships when you use code HOLIDAY at checkout.
That means you can watch What is a Woman? The Greatest Lie Ever Sold, Terror on the Prairie, a plethora of Peterson content from our good friend Jordan, and all the other things you might have missed this year.
But that's only the beginning because in 2023, we will have brand new content, including kids' content, entertaining movies, informative documentaries.
If you're already a member, thank you.
And if you're not yet a member, now is the time to join.
Yes, Virginia, there is still a chance to save 30% on your Daily Wire Plus membership.
Go to dailywire.com/slash Clavin, use code holiday at checkout, and get the gift that keeps on giving.
That's dailywire.com/slash clavin today.
Charlotte's Book Journey00:15:38
So, I'm so happy to have today in the studio with me Charlotte Pence's father.
Charlotte works for the Daily Wire.
She's a wonderful young person.
I'm sure you've had some other jobs.
Mr. Vice President, it is wonderful to have you here and author of the new book, So Help Me God.
Thank you for coming in.
I appreciate it.
Thank you, Andrew.
I'm a fan of my daughter, The Daily Wire, and I'm a fan of Andrew Clavin.
Oh, well, thank you.
That's very nice to see you.
I really am.
It's great to be with you.
Back at you.
I appreciate it very much.
So you're running for president?
I've never been asked that before.
This is the place.
This is the place where you want to make the announcement.
I could tell you it's something, you know, it was about 10 years ago when I was in the Congress that I was starting to show up more on cable television.
I was in Republican leadership the last time we retired Nancy Pelosi.
And people started asking me that question back then.
And as I write in my book, you know, I was very humbled by it.
But I always answered it the same way.
They said, you ever think about running for president?
I'd say, well, no more, no less than any other kid that grew up with a cornfield in his backyard.
I mean, that's kind of what it is to be an American.
But, you know, I can tell you we're giving it prayerful consideration.
I've been, I feel like the country's in a lot of trouble right now.
We've got inflation at a 40-year high, a crisis at our southern border.
America's place in the world, I think, has been weakened by the policies of this administration from the disastrous withdrawal of Afghanistan to re-entering negotiations with Iran.
And so we're giving consideration about what role that we would play.
We're giving consideration to being a candidate.
And we're going to take the holidays to listen to one another as a family.
And then we're going to continue to travel around the country and listen to the American people.
I love what Ronald Reagan said once: that the American people have a funny way of letting you know if they want you to run for president.
We've gotten a lot of encouragement over the last year and a half around the country.
We'll continue to listen and learn.
And like I always say, we'll go where we're called.
So I think it was on January 6th, it may have been January 7th, I texted Charlotte and told her that I thought, in your quiet way, I thought you would single-handedly save the Republic by refusing to do what Donald Trump had asked you to do.
But I know that a lot of people watching this show and who listened to me will never forgive you for that.
They thought you, you know, let down the side.
Can you win those people back?
I mean, if you ran for president, can you get the left already hates you, right, just for being just for having faith that they hate you or not for not committing adultery?
But they've always, you really get on their nerves.
But that really made the Trump, the Ever Trumpers, feel, you know, that you weren't with them.
Can you win them back?
Well, I think that would be up to every one of those Americans.
But I would say whatever the future holds for my family, I have great confidence in the people in our movement.
I remember it was the night before January 6th.
The president and I were in a private conversation in the Oval Office.
It would eventually turn into a very difficult conversation.
But in the early moments, as I captured my book, the President pointed to the crowd that had gathered already outside the window.
And he looked at me and he said, see that crowd out there?
And I said, I saw them, Mr. President.
And he said, that crowd loves us.
And I said, well, that crowd loves you.
But then I paused and I looked at him very sincerely and I said, but that crowd also loves the Constitution.
And I said, you and I both took an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States.
And I really believe, Andrew, and will always believe in my heart of hearts that we did our duty on that day, January 6th, to uphold the oath of office I took, the oath that ended with a prayer, so help me God, that would become the title of my book.
It was a promise I said that I made to the American people, but I also made before Almighty God.
And I was determined to keep that promise.
And my hope is that over time, if we feel called into public life, the people will reflect on what the Constitution says about our duties that day, and they'll at least know that in that moment we did what we believed, that we were sworn to do, that as it says in Psalm 15, that we kept our oath even when it hurts.
But I'll trust the American people and trust people in our movement.
Trump beat up on you pretty badly after that.
He said a lot of very harsh things.
And yet you treat him with a great deal of respect in this book.
I was kind of taken aback by it.
You really depict him with dignity and some competence at what he's doing.
What was the experience?
What was it like?
I mean, for three years, that was a great presidency.
What was it like working with a guy like that?
Very volatile, obviously, but also intensely committed to what he was doing.
Well, let me say it always comes as a surprise when I say this, because some people think President Trump and I are a little bit different.
Look, President Trump was not just my president.
He was my friend.
We really developed a close working relationship over those four and a half years, which made the waning days of the administration that much more disappointing.
But as I try and write in the book, we had a partnership.
It was not a partnership.
There's only one president.
But we had a working relationship rather that I'll always be proud of.
We worked very closely to rebuild the military, largest investment in our national defense since the days of Ronald Reagan.
President and I worked very closely together to pass the largest tax cut and tax reform in American history.
He involved me in the interview of Supreme Court nominees in all three cases.
And we have three extraordinary new members of the Supreme Court of the United States.
And he also tasked me to travel around the country to tell our story, travel around the world to represent America.
And we had really forged the kind of relationship where when we were both at the White House every day, I probably spent four hours a day in the Oval Office.
Really?
And when neither one of us was traveling, we invariably spoke at least once a day.
And oftentimes we'd speak early and speak late.
And I'll always be proud of our record, but I'll also be proud as I try and capture in the book Of a friendship and also a working relationship that I think greatly benefited the American people.
You know, your book got a wonderful review in the Wall Street Journal by one of my favorite young writers.
I think he's the best young newswriter actually in the country, a guy named Barton Swain.
And he had this very funny line about you, which I had thought myself, where he said, you have a propensity, if I could state it boldly, to be right when everybody else is wrong.
And he talks about the fact that you protected religious rights before Obergfeld came down and you were ridiculed for saying that you were careful how you met with women right before the Me Too movement came out.
And you are treated as not as badly as Trump.
Nobody is treated as badly as Trump in the press, but you're treated pretty badly.
I mean, everything you say is wrong until it turns out to be right, when they just forget about it.
Have you ever confronted the press about this?
Have you ever just said to a reporter, like, you're not being fair?
Well, you know, I quote my late father, who somebody told me is actually the secret star of so help me God.
My dad was a combat veteran in Korea.
He lived the American dream.
He and my mom built a small gasoline station business in southern Indiana.
He left us before my 30th year, but he's still a big influence in my life.
But I quote dad in the book one time saying, you know, the fair is what comes to the county in July.
Life isn't fair.
I don't remember looking a liberal media reporter in the eye and telling him they weren't being fair.
To me, that would have been being redundant.
I remember I had a reporter ask me one time, they were flying in the back of Air Force Two, and I'd go back and chat to the reporters from time to time off the record and just, you know, make sure, particularly on foreign trips, that they were getting what they need to do their job.
And this one reporter, who I thought was a little bit surprised at the penses that they encountered in person from the stereotypes that they bought into, said to me, you know, you ever feel like you ought to work to change the stereotypes about you and the criticism?
I said, you know, I think truth is a force of nature.
And I said, you know, I expect the truth about the pencils will come out.
People will someday know who we are and who we aren't.
And it was one of the reasons why writing this book was such a joy for me.
I mean, I'll never be Andrew Clavin.
I'm a big fan of your writing.
Oh, thank you.
But the ability to tell our story, growing up in a small town, in a big Irish Catholic family, walking away from faith, having no interest in faith, but then coming to a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ when I was in college, meeting the girl of my dreams, failing at politics early, but then coming to a conclusion that my Christian faith required me to carry myself in a certain way in the public square.
So when a decade later politics came back around, we sought during our service in the Congress as governor of Indiana and as vice president to carry our way, our life, in a way that first honored God, treated others the way we wanted to be treated.
And the ability to tell that story was very humbling to me.
And the response we've gotten around the country has just been very meaningful.
I want to get back to your faith in a minute.
There's one more question, one more Trump question I want to ask you.
You just said, you just talked about your friendship with Trump and that benefited the country.
But you also recently told Brett Baer, who was watching, that you thought the country needed to move on.
Has he changed?
Has the situation changed?
Why do you say that now?
I think we're living in a different time.
Look, I don't think anybody could have defeated Hillary Clinton other than Donald Trump in 2016.
And I was slow to recognize that.
I endorsed another candidate in the Indiana primary, Andrew.
And in all fairness, Ted Cruz did win all three of the counties I campaigned with him in.
Donald Trump won the other 89.
But after I joined the ticket and we developed a relationship, you know, what I saw, the connection that he made to the American people and the sheer weight of his persona was an equal match to decades of a Clinton organization that was poised to add another eight years of liberalism on top of the left-wing policies of the Obama-Biden administration.
And I think he was the right moment at the right time.
I just think right now in the life of the nation, the American people long for us to get back to those conservative policies that people on every corner of the Daily Wire talk about and celebrate, the things that hold up our values, things that hold up free market principles and freedom and faith.
But I also, I've just been consistently hearing people come up to me and say, we'd like to get back to a politics that has the kind of respect and civility that the American people show one another on a regular basis.
Look, our politics is probably more divided today than any time in my lifetime.
But we moved back to Indiana a year and a half ago.
I shop at the Kroger.
I drive my own car.
I get gas.
I mean, I've traveled to 35 states in these midterm elections.
I'm not convinced the American people are as divided as our politics.
I mean, people of this country have figured out a long time ago how to get along with people they don't agree with.
And I think they'd like to see leadership that reflects that civility and respect, and at least leaves the possibility of solving some of these intractable problems which the corrosive nature of politics today,
the incessant attacks that our administration and the president took from before we were inaugurated, and then the president's capacity to hit back and oftentimes hit back harder doesn't create an environment where you can look for and find common ground to solve some of these intractable problems.
You know, I agree with you about the American people not being as divided.
I think there is an elite cadre of people who are terribly divided, but the actual people live together quite well, it seems to me.
They do.
And they demonstrate incredible generosity to one another in times of hardship.
I mean, I saw it again.
Karen and I not long ago made our way down to southwest Florida, which was stricken by Hurricane Ian.
It's part of the country that's meant so much to me and my family.
My kids virtually grew up on the beaches of Sanibel Island.
Charlotte could tell you that.
It's been there probably 20 times growing up.
But to see the way, you know, literally a ministry called Samaritan's Purse that we're familiar with.
They had a lot of my money, those guys.
It's a wonderful ministry.
But that great organization, when we visited there over the Thanksgiving weekend, they had already helped 7,000 families, you know, clear debris and clear their homes out and get resettled.
And they had 6,000 Americans that came from all over the country, dropped everything to go help absolute strangers, people they would never see again.
I'm telling you, this is a great country.
We just got to have government as good as our people again.
I came to Christ at the age of 49, so it was a long time.
And the difference from one day to another in joy, the uprising of joy, was astounding.
I mean, my wife turned to me like a week later and said, you're a completely changed person, utterly.
And I know, and your faith is in every page of this book.
I haven't had a chance to finish this book.
It's long, and we only knew you were coming at the last minute.
But it's in every page.
You start every chapter with a Bible verse.
It's called So Help Me God, and you talk about it, and you openly talk about it a lot, and get a lot of hostility for it.
But faith is declining in this country, and church attendance is declining in this country, and the hostility toward faith, which never existed when I was a lad at all, is now incredibly intense.
I mean, and a lot of it comes under the guise of gay rights.
But I'm an artist.
I've worked with gay people all my life, and most of them are believers in some form or another.
So it's really the activists who are doing this.
Is there a chance to turn that tide?
Blessed00:03:21
Is that something that you think about, or do you think it just has to, God is in charge and he'll take care of it as he will?
Well, look, the freedom of religion was our first freedom.
A casual study of the American founding.
The pilgrims.
Understand that the people came here first and foremost to be able to live, to work, to worship according to the dictates of their conscience and their faith.
And that's why it's in the First Amendment.
And I have, I write about it in the book.
You can skip ahead to the chapter entitled Blessed, because I think the verse at the top of that chapter is, you're blessed when people speak ill of you.
So I talk about all the times I was blessed.
But even my wife Karen, who's an amazing person, deserves more credit for all of our kids than I ever will.
Karen, when she was Second Lady of the United States, went back to the elementary Christian school that she taught art at when we were in the Congress.
When we were at the White House, she would over a day and a half a week with Secret Service and taught art at Emmanuel Christian School, but literally at one point came under fire for teaching at a Christian school that held to a biblical view of marriage.
And I remember I was on national television in the first couple of days.
You know, my brother said one time that I have the longest fuse, but the worst temper.
And what usually sets it off is things about my family.
And I was, my Irish was all the way up on that.
And I called out several networks that were running criticisms of my wife.
And I just said that, you know, I just thought better of those networks that they would engage in that kind of religious intolerance.
And to their credit, they dropped the story quickly and understood that.
And I think that's the way forward.
The good news is we've got a Supreme Court majority now that is rock solid on religious liberty.
I mean, in the wake of the Oberfell decision approving gay marriage in the country, it would be just a few short years later that the famous cake bakers case upheld the religious liberty of a baker by a 7-2 vote, even before Amy Coney Barrett was added or every member of the court was added.
So I think we've got a real bulwark in our judiciary for religious freedom.
And I think that's exactly what the vast majority of Americans want.
I believe this is a profoundly tolerant nation and that the intolerance that comes in the name of tolerance is not emblematic of the overwhelming majority of the American people, whether whatever religious tradition they come from or if religion and faith is not a part of their life at all, they understand that that really goes to the heart of what it is to live in this country.
Arizona's Values-Based Schools00:15:08
And I have great confidence that we're sorting out those fault lines in the country in ways that will allow us to move forward as a country.
I don't want to keep you forever, but I have two last questions.
One is, if you had to pick one domestic issue that you were going to run on in 2024, what would it be?
What is the thing you think is the top problem we have?
Well, I really do believe that the most underreported story today is the flatlining of military spending.
At a time when China continues to exercise more and more military aggression in the Taiwan Straits, in the South China Sea, North Korea has returned to its provocations, firing a record number of missiles in the Asia-Pacific.
Iran has continued to return to its menacing posture.
And of course, the unconscionable war of aggression launched by Russia in Ukraine that goes on at this very hour now more than ever.
We ought to return to peace through strength.
And I really believe that the reason why Russia never even tried to redraw international lines by force during our administration, which had occurred in the prior two administrations and has occurred again with the invasion of Ukraine, is in part because our administration invested in our military in record and historic ways.
And we were willing to use American military force to advance our interests in the world, whether it be striking Syria after the unconscionable use of chemical weapons against their own people, allowing our armed forces to take down the ISIS Caliphate and their leader, or taking down Qasem Salamani, the most dangerous terrorist in the world.
I think our administration, the world knew we meant business and that we were prepared to back it up.
I worry today after the disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan that we've eroded the credibility of American strength in the world and we need to return to it.
The corollary of that, though, Andrew, I will tell you, is putting our fiscal house in order.
I mean, we are literally on track with more than $30 trillion in debt.
We are on track that in a matter of a few short years, the service on our debt in the federal budget will exceed what we spend on national defense.
And I'm mindful of the fact that when George Washington becomes our first president, his first objective in his first administration was to deal with debt.
Because he knew that if the United States was deeply in debt, that when England came back, not if they came back, but when they came back, which they would in 1812, that we wouldn't be able to marshal the resources to put up a defense.
I think the combination of those two things, providing for the common defense, which is the first obligation of the government, but having leadership that has the ability to bring people together to bring about the kind of changes to put us on a trajectory for a balanced budget, I think the next standard bearer for our party, I think the next president, the next administration need to take on both causes.
So my last question, like most Christians, the thing you get hit on most is your cultural ideas.
And I think like most Americans, I don't really care what people's personal lives are.
I don't want to butt into anybody's business.
But I can't help seeing this invasion of schools with pornographic material, the use of drag queens among children.
It strikes me, and the butchery of healthy young people for transgenderism.
It's a word I almost never use because I know we're all flawed, but it strikes me as a genuine wave of evil passing through the culture.
How do you respond to that?
How would you respond to that in a position of power?
We just simply, number one, I'm as troubled about every one of those developments.
I was in the state of Virginia about a week before their governor's election with an education freedom event in Loudoun County, and the gymnasium was packed, and it was parents that had literally stood up in the wake of an appalling action by a school board that there had been a transgender student who had assaulted another student in a restroom they were able to access,
and they'd simply been quietly transferred to another school, endangering other students.
Look, I'm not only a proud father, which you've been nice enough to mention more than once, but we became grandparents in the last year.
Congratulations.
And we got a couple more on the way.
And there's nothing more important in this country.
I don't care what your politics than our kids.
And I think the answer to all of these issues can actually be found in the state of Arizona.
Maybe one of the most underreported stories of conservative progress this year was that Arizona became the first state in America to enact universal school choice.
Now, every parent in Arizona can choose where their children go to school, public, private, parochial, homeschool.
There are schools literally beginning to form in places in Arizona around values.
I trust parents with their kids.
And I really do believe that so many of these issues, whether it be the critical race theory that this administration has returned to promoting in our schools, promoting in our military, or whether it be some of these appalling practices of exposing children or discussing issues that ought to only be talked about by parents.
I think all of that settles out if we simply empower parents to choose where their children go to school.
We ought to be protecting children, I believe, from what would amount in my mind.
Our foundation in Washington is going to get involved in a case in the schools in Iowa that are attempting to allow children to go through sex change surgery and counseling without parental consent.
We need to be protecting the role of parents in the lives of their children when it comes to values and when it comes to education.
And I really do believe the school choice is the answer to that.
When I was governor of the state of Indiana, I talk about the fact in my book that we doubled what was then the largest school choice program in the country.
But I want to give credit where credit is due to Governor Doug Ducey and the legislature in Arizona.
They finally did it.
Universal school choice for every parent in the country.
There are states around the country led by Republican governors that are already now looking at that model.
And I commend it to your attention to everybody at Daily Wire because it's an idea whose time has come.
We empower parents to choose where their kids go to school.
Not all the problems go away, but a whole lot of the problems go away because parents are going to make the decision to have kids in the school that's going to give them a foundation in education, a foundation in their values, and put the interests of the kids and their families first.
That's great.
That's what real conservatism sounds like.
The book is So Help Me God by Mike Pence, a really interesting story of your whole life, but centrally of three fascinating, four fascinating years in the White House.
Mr. Vice President, thank you so much.
It's a real pleasure to meet you.
I've always wanted to, and I'm glad you came.
Great to meet you finally, Andrew.
Thanks.
I appreciate the time.
Thank you.
All right.
So we're talking about the use of the media, the left's use of their domination of the media to convince people that the fight is over and the things that they love are gone.
And anybody who wants to bring them back is a white supremacist or whatever.
On the members block last week, I talked about an incident.
I think it was at Boise State College.
A fellow named Scott Yenner wrote a book, wrote a book, wrote an article in First Things describing how he was canceled.
And I was so appalled by the fervor and the organization of it that I asked one of the people I think is one of the best writers and reporters we have at the Daily Wire, Megan Basham, who I love bringing on the show anyway, but I also love bringing her on because she does such a good job.
I asked her to look into this, look into cancellation.
Megan, it's good to see you.
It's good to see you.
Thanks for having me.
Thanks for the assignment.
Well, you know, I've just, I can't, I couldn't believe what I was reading.
And, you know, I didn't, you are, as I say, I think one of our top reporters, if not our top reporter.
And I just wanted to know how they do this stuff.
So as you dig into it, it's fascinating.
It's really disconcerting.
And it's very easy to fall into an obsessive rabbit hole chasing all of the different threads of how this happened.
So to start out with, you know, I think it's important to say, okay, what was this speech that drew all of this ire toward this political science professor, Scott Yenner, on the campus of Boise State?
So there was a lot of talk in this speech about how feminism is weakening the American family, which is weakening the nation.
But there were two particular comments that really stuck out.
Okay.
I think we have a clip of that.
Let's hear.
Our independent women seek their purpose in life in mid-level bureaucratic jobs like human resource management, environmental protection, and marketing.
They are more medicated, meddlesome, and quarrelsome than women need to be.
Every effort must be made not to recruit women into engineering, but rather to recruit and demand more of men who become engineers.
Ditto for med school and the law and every trade.
Okay, so I know that's evil because I agree with every word of it.
So he's really sunk.
He degraded himself completely.
Okay, so what's the reaction?
Yeah, and I will say, you know, for me personally, I found this speech provocative, but in a good way, and even a little convicting.
So, you know, the reaction has been that he has said something really outrageous, something reprehensible and deserving of censure.
And, you know, no talk at all about the fact that from a statistical basis, from an evidentiary basis, Yenner is largely right.
Women are more medicated.
Liberal careerist women do tend to be unhappier, self-reported.
They are unhappier.
So that was really the focus.
Immediately, you saw the swarm of social media mobs.
And we expect that.
I mean, we've all kind of been through that if you're any type of commentator or reporter on the right.
But in this case, it was something much more structured.
So immediately, he started getting hundreds of emails to his work email.
He started getting hacking attempts on his social media accounts, on his banking accounts.
His wife started getting emails.
And so there was a real sense from Yenner, yeah, that what was happening was that this was a coordinated attack on him.
And there's a lot of evidence to suggest he's right.
At the same time that was going on, the president of this university, Marlene Trump, and that's Trump, not Trump, she also started getting a lot of emails.
So there's been some public record requests from some Idaho education outlets who were able to actually dig through the emails and they were looking to see what the university did to discipline Yenner.
But for my purposes, it was really interesting to see how many of these emails that the administration was receiving were not coming from people in Idaho.
They were coming from activist groups.
Yes.
And to that point, one of the emails was really her asking, What do I do about this petition?
There was a petition that came up.
It was, it garnered 8,000 signatures from people demanding that the university censure, discipline, and go as far as fire Scott Yenner.
So one of the people who did that was a guy named Howard Clayberger.
And I want to give Howard some credit really quickly because of all of the people who joined this cancel mob, who really partnered up, who made comments to the media, who gave comments to the media like CNN saying that Scott Yenner is like the Taliban.
And that was a comparison that was made for that comment.
Only Howard Klayberger was willing to talk to us.
Who else did you call?
Just give me a range.
Oh, wow.
So we called the state representatives who joined the protests.
We called Democratic Congresswoman Brooke Green, who joined the protest.
We called the mayor.
We called the former state House Speaker, who's a Republican and Christian, actually, Bruce Newcomb.
So we called a lot of people, some of whom you would think would be willing to talk to us, particularly Bruce Newcomb.
He was not.
So I actually give Howard Klayberger a lot of credit for being willing to talk to us.
Okay.
He was the author of this petition that garnered all these signatures.
And when I asked him why he got involved, it was a bit amusing that he did say the main reason was because of his girlfriend who also helped launch the petition.
A woman named quarrelsome and meddlesome.
Yeah.
Yeah.
Well, she, she certainly, I think she, by her own admission, I have not spoken to her, but she has a trail online that suggests quarrelsome, at least activist, let's put it that way.
She likes to be an activist, particularly on feminist issues.
Okay.
So he told me that his girlfriend is 35 years old.
She is not interested in family.
She's not interested in having children.
She's looking for a careerist path and she's very interested in these topics.
So she asked him to launch this petition with her.
And I will let him sort of describe what motivated it.
She ended up taking up a gender discrimination lawsuit against the big old Lockheed Martin Corporation and ended up winning a settlement there.
And so she's very in tune when things that involve women and careers come up.
And she has her undergrad and her master's and now she is pursuing her law degree at Golden Gate in order to fight for women at the workplace level.
So, you know, that was really what sparked her interest.
And what was fascinating to me was to see that, as far as I can tell, and by his own admission, Klayberger and Ivins have no connection to Boise State University and don't even appear to have any connection to Idaho.
Calls for Discipline Misunderstood00:07:33
So they just really, so they just launched this petition.
What were they calling for exactly?
They wanted him fired or they wanted him discipline?
Well, and so that was, you know, part of the conversation that I had with Klayberger.
So he said, look, in hindsight, we were not asking for cancellation.
We were asking for an investigation because a man who says something like this, someone on the faculty at a university who says that women should not be drafted into disciplines like, you know, STEM, your science, technology, engineering, math, how fair is he going to be in the classroom?
So he says they were just looking for an investigation, not necessarily a cancellation.
Now, I would disagree with that a little bit.
And here's why.
Because the petition does specifically ask for discipline up to and including firing Yenner.
Wow.
So, yeah.
So we had a little bit of a back and forth on that.
And again, I appreciated him being willing to talk to me, but I think the language of that petition speaks for itself.
And it also, at the end of it, had a link to the university's form where you could file Title IX complaints.
So if you're doing that, you're soliciting Title IX complaints.
These aren't people who are of their own volition going to the university and saying, gosh, I feel like I was unfairly treated.
It was sort of whipping up people to bring forward accusations.
So I asked Klayberger about that a little bit.
And his response was that, well, it's because Scott Yenner said these things publicly that he deserves to have this kind of investigation.
So here's what he told me.
The thing that was said was said publicly, thus it is totally fair to address it publicly.
If there wasn't meant to be any backlash, it wouldn't have been said publicly.
It would have been in a letter to somebody.
But that's absurd.
I mean, of course, you have the right to argue with him and to declare that you disagree with him, but to call for his firing and an investigation and Title IX, which is such an unfair tool to use.
I mean, that's not the same thing.
He said something publicly, so you can debate him publicly.
Well, and he's a professor.
He is supposed to be talking about political ideas, and that's what he was doing.
So, you know, so that is going on on the one hand.
And then on the other hand, you had the same kind of statements being issued by the university where they were saying, look, we protect free speech.
We support Scott Yenner's rights to say what he wants, to, and they said, express offensive ideas.
So in this statement where they're saying we support free speech and academic freedom, but at the same time, we acknowledge that it's offensive.
But in those statements also, the university added a solicitation to Title IX complaints.
They said, if you feel that you've been unfairly treated or have concerns, contact this office.
So it really felt like they were stacking the deck against Yenner.
And part of that is the fact that Yenner himself was not included on the email chains where these statements went out.
In fact, he told me they would have had to take special effort to remove me from the email list where these statements were put out.
So he said he found out from his students and that it seemed to him like they were really trying to keep him from being able to respond.
Well, so, I mean, how here you've got a guy who's out, seems to be outside of the state.
He's not part of the state.
How vast an organization is this?
In other words, do you feel that there are people who wait for this to happen and then move?
Or do you feel that, oh no, this was online and they heard it and they were so upset they moved?
No, so this doesn't feel organic to me for the most part.
And look, that happens.
We know that the social media happens.
We know that the people get whipped up into a frenzy.
But what you also saw here were some very sophisticated and targeted attacks.
There was a group called Idaho 97, and they also got involved.
They also put out calls for a Title IX investigation and Title IX complaint.
So you really just had all kinds of groups, including the university itself, saying, please give us a reason to investigate this guy.
And at that point, you're not just complaining, right?
You're not just saying, hey, we don't like what he said.
You are targeting his livelihood.
You are targeting his job.
So this Title IX thing, I'm not sure people understand this because Title IX was basically meant to make sure there were as much women's sports as they are boy sports, even though traditionally women are not as interested in sports.
It made a very, it closed down a lot of a lot of boy sports, but Sports Illustrator celebrates it every year.
It's one of these great things.
But this was an Obama innovation where he wrote letters.
He had his administration write letters to colleges.
Dear colleague, you know, you want to make sure this is happening.
So it's kind of gotten out of control.
How does this Title IX work?
Now, we've only got like three minutes.
So, but how does this Title IX work when it goes off?
Well, I think it's important to know that when you're looking at a Title IX investigation, this is not the normal type of due process that we expect from the legal courts.
What you have is the investigator and the judge are basically the same person.
So you can make these complaints anonymously, which is why all of these groups were saying, hey, give us your complaints.
So the students can make them anonymously.
The accused is not allowed to cross-examine these accusations.
And he's not even really allowed to talk to the students.
There's very little of what you can do to defend yourself in this, except unless you have hard records.
So that is what Scott Yenner was able to do.
He, God bless him, he knew this was coming.
Yes.
And so, yeah, he took great pains to keep all of his records, keep all of his lecture notes, keep, he kept recordings and within an hour was basically able to say, look, I graded fairly.
I allowed class participation fairly.
But think about the normal people who don't have that kind of documentation.
I mean, you're in big trouble if you get into a situation like this in academia and you cannot defend yourself and you don't have those kind of records.
So really, at the end of it all, they also say, well, look, there was insufficient evidence.
They don't say you're cleared.
They say there was insufficient evidence.
And so I think that kind of encapsulates the whole process.
You're never not guilty.
Right.
You're never not guilty.
And also the people in the article, he said the people who accused him didn't show up.
So he never faced them.
He never got a chance to cross-question them or anything.
You know, this seems so dark to me because this is a guy obviously with very strong, well-thought-out opinions, right?
So, but if he didn't, if he just made a comment in a bar, if he just said something offhand, they could have done the same thing to him or if made a comment in class or on a panel where you're being questioned.
They could have done the same thing to him and he would never have stood a chance.
Right.
And, you know, what was really alarming to me was the degree to which the people you would expect to have his back didn't.
I mean, you had people who were saying, not only should he lose his job, but you had fellow Christians.
He's a Christian.
He's involved in his church.
He's involved in a Christian school.
And they were saying he shouldn't get to serve on the board anymore because his tone was not gentle enough in this speech.
You had, again, the Republican speaker of the state house who privately emailed the university president and said, I think you should cut this guy loose.
Adoption Over Infertility Treatments00:10:20
Wow.
And so there's just no attempt to support these people when they get in these situations.
We're always cutting everyone loose.
Yes.
All right.
I've got to stop there.
Megan, it's great to see you.
Have a Merry Christmas.
And I will see you again in January.
Thank you very much.
I appreciate it.
Thank you.
And you have a Merry Christmas as well.
Thank you.
All right.
If you are a non-subscribing listener, the Clavenless Week is fast approaching, which it's kind of like being an unbaptized child.
You know, it's like you cast into hell, even though you didn't do anything wrong.
It's kind of the same thing.
It's not the same thing, but However, the one thing we like to do before you are plunged into that darkness where there's wailing and gnashing of teeth in the Clavenless Week, we'd like to solve all your problems.
So at least you go somewhat happy.
And we do that via the mailbag.
I'm Joe Biden, and I'm gay.
Yeah!
What is going on back there?
All right, this is from Hunter, not that Hunter, I assume.
He who is Gandalf, but with a pen, not a wand.
I'm writing in with a question that's been plaguing me for a long time.
My wife and I have an amazing marriage.
We are each other's only kiss.
We started dating when we were 15.
That's great.
Both of us are strong Christians.
We've wanted to have many children, but I'm 30 now.
We've been through every infertility treatment.
Nothing seems to be getting us closer to having a family.
I want my own children.
I want my wife to go on.
It's why I married her.
God hasn't told us to stop trying.
What are we to do?
How can we find peace knowing this could be our quote-unquote end?
Thank you for your time.
Okay.
So I have a two-part answer here.
I'm not sure of this because you don't say it, but I kind of get the feeling that maybe your wife is starting to say, this is too much.
These treatments are too much.
I want to stop the treatment.
I don't know if that's true or not.
I'm just sensing that.
But I just want to say, if that's true, if she wants to stop doing any infertility treatments, you, as the head of the family, have to rule in her favor.
That is the right thing to do, right?
Being the leader of the family does not mean that you, obviously, that you get everything you want.
It means that you lift yourself up above your own interests and judge fairly and rightly for the good of the marriage.
And if your wife is saying, I have had enough, it's making me feel bad or it's just too strenuous, it's stressing me out, whether you want your own children or not, you have to rule in her favor and say, if you don't want to do that, we're not going to do it.
It's her body.
And it's something that, you know, I think I know these treatments can be stressful and they can be dangerous too.
They can be unhealthy as well.
So if she feels that way, I strongly advise you to say, to not pressure her and not bully, certainly not bully her, but just say, okay, then that part of this is over.
So let's say that's what happens.
And you can obviously go on having unprotected sex.
Sometimes there's a surprise.
A lot of times, actually, that happens.
And of course, I know you say you want your own children, but you can adopt.
Remember, that's a very Christian thing to do.
Now, I'm not going to tell you, I always hate when people say that, well, it's just the same.
It's the same.
It's the same thing.
Nothing that's different is the same.
And adoption is, I think, a beautiful, beautiful thing, but that doesn't make it the same as having a child of your body.
I get that, and I understand it.
But remember, it is an actual, adoption is an actual good.
Joseph did it in the Bible, so we know it's an actual good and an actual Christian thing to do.
So it's something you might consider.
And sometimes when people adopt, somehow they relax and their bodies relax and then they get pregnant.
But still, that's not why you should do it.
I think that you might just have to come to terms.
If this is God's plan for your life, then you have to think about what you're going to do.
And you might want to start doing that now.
I mean, it's been a long time.
You've been trying, continue to have unprotected sex, you know, and time it so that you make sure that you're having it at the best possible times.
But, you know, it might be good to think, okay, well, then how are we going to enjoy our marriage and feel it is a contributory good thing, a gift to the world, and a gift to one another if we don't have kids?
Because this happens too, you know, and it's life not always, you don't always get the endings you want.
And so that's something that you have to live with with grace and not let it plague you unto death.
I mean, you have to accept the will of God, which is just and righteous altogether.
From Melody, good afternoon, Mr. Claven, a long time fan.
I want to say how much I appreciate your humorous and insightful commentary on life, faith, literature, and politics.
Your perspective is truly unique on the right.
And I hope to continue.
You continue writing and recording videos for many years of scumbo.
Thank you very much.
I have a rather lengthy and personal question.
I'll try to edit this down.
I'm a 20-year-old woman with bipolar 2 disorder, which is a milder form of bipolar that you get hypomania, but you don't get full manic episodes.
Over the past two years, I've managed to stabilize my mood swings with the help of a therapist.
But throughout most of my teens, I was deeply miserable, sometimes suicidal.
I decided early that I would never date or marry.
I don't want to bring this to a husband, and it's not fair to any children we might have because it can be inherited.
But she says, I'm now able to exercise a higher level of self-awareness and control.
I can see myself getting married and perhaps adopting children, but I can't justify having a child of my own, knowing the risk.
It doesn't seem fair.
So even if my husband agreed, it seems like a decision he might regret later in life if the kid was bipolar.
What would you recommend that I do?
Do I stay single my whole life and try to create meaning outside of a family?
It's an issue I'm discussing with my therapist, but I'd really appreciate your perspective and advice.
Thank you for taking the time to read and consider my question.
First of all, let me congratulate you and praise you for being so thoughtful and moral in proceeding this way and considering the moral things.
I know many people, some of them friends of mine, who have not really thought through the morality of their actions in regards to things like that, and they do what they do, and it's not my job to judge them or scold them or anything, but I do want to praise you for looking at this situation from a deeply moral, in a deeply moral way, even though it costs you.
And the answer, I think, is, you know, obviously when you date a man, when you go out with a man somewhere between your first date and the time when you start to discuss seriously what your relationship is about, you have to tell him all of this.
He has to know.
It is important, right, that he has to know and be aware.
And I think I can't tell you whether to risk having your own child, but I can tell you that's a fair consideration.
It does have a hereditary, we don't understand it, but it does have a hereditary aspect, bipolar.
It does produce misery.
It does produce suicide.
And so adoption is a good option.
I mean, adoption is a beautiful thing.
Adoption is, like I said just before, Joseph did it when he took on Jesus.
And I think it is a beautiful, beautiful thing to do and to give a home to a child who wouldn't have a home otherwise, to give love to a child who wouldn't have that.
If you are convinced that you're stable, I assume you're on meds.
If you're dedicated to staying on your meds, I think, yes, you can get married as long as your husband is, your future husband is well aware of where you stand.
And I think adoption is just a really good path to go on.
And if you want to take the chance, that's up to you.
But I would think adoption is a really good idea.
From anonymous, I'm a 31-year-old husband to a wonderful woman, and we have three little boys.
We've created a faith-based home with conservative values.
Even though they don't disrespect us for what we believe, my in-laws are extremely left.
My sister-in-law now identifies with a man.
She's in her mid-20s, again, her transition.
She's never pushed her views on us, and whenever she comes around, she acts perfectly normal.
I enjoy her company.
She's extremely kind and funny, a person I think highly of, always willing to lend a hand.
They don't go to church anymore, and they've completely, her parents don't go to church anymore.
They bought into everything.
My sister-in-law has been dating a girl.
My question is, she may or may not ask me to be one of her groomsmen at her wedding.
I have a gut feeling she will.
What should I do if she does?
All right, well, am I a bad man for turning her down?
He says it will break her heart.
You know, okay, first of all, sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof.
This hasn't happened yet, so you don't have to worry about it.
When it does happen, you're going to have to think about it.
I think it's right for you to think about her feelings.
I think it's decent of you.
Here's what, I can only tell you what I would do in this situation.
If I were very much opposed to what was going on in every sense of the word, if it was against my religion, if I thought it was foul, if I thought it was sinful, I would be very kind.
I would go to the wedding, but I would say, look, you know, I can't participate with this.
It's against my religious rules.
I love you desperately.
You know, you're a wonderful person.
This is just something that my religion forbids.
So let me come.
I'll dance at your wedding, but I'm not going to be part of the wedding.
And I think that that would be the kindest thing to do.
If I were in your position, if I had your feelings, I think that's what I would do, is I would say, I will come because I love you, and I will come as a show of my love, but I can't participate in the ceremony because I don't believe it, because it's against my religion.
That's what I would do.
And, you know, you're not in charge of her life.
You're not there to regulate her life.
She sounds like a kind, good person.
I understand your feelings about her, you know, sexuality and all that.
And I think that's the kindest thing you can do is just say, I will celebrate with you.
You know, in the Bible, it says, be joyful with those who rejoice.
And you will go there to be joyful with someone you love who is rejoicing.
That's why you will go.
But you can't be part of it because you're morally opposed to it.
It's a tough situation.
It is.
And act in love.
Act in love.
Put the love first.
That's the thing.
And don't listen to people who say, yes, the loving thing to do is to throw a rock through the church to tell them, baloney, baloney.