All Episodes
Previous Next
April 23, 2025 - Lionel Nation
51:22
Three Pillars Fall: Vatican Power Shaken, Davos Leader Quits, Soros Control Fades
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Disaster can strike when least expected.
Wildfires, hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes.
They can instantly turn your world upside down.
Dirty Man Underground Safes is a safeguard against chaos.
Hidden below, your valuables remain protected no matter what.
Prepare for the unexpected.
Use code DIRTY10 for 10% off and secure peace of mind for you and your family.
Dirty Man Safe.
When disaster hits, security isn't optional.
The storm is coming.
Markets are crashing.
Banks are closing.
When the economy collapses, how will you survive?
You need a plan.
Cash, gold, bitcoin.
Dirty Man Safes keep your assets hidden underground at a secret location ready for any crisis.
Don't wait for disaster to strike.
Get your Dirty Man safe today.
Use promo code DIRTY10 for 10% off your order.
When uncertainty strikes, peace of mind is priceless.
Dirty Man underground safes protects what matters most.
Discreetly designed, these safes are where innovation meets reliability, keeping your valuables close yet secure.
Be ready for anything.
Use code DIRTY10 for 10% off today and take the first step towards safeguarding your future.
Dirty Man's Safe.
Because protecting your family starts with protecting what you treasure.
So The war of the globalists, or whoever you want to call these people, has never, ever stopped.
They are continuing without surcease.
And for reasons I will never understand, we seem to just be focusing on everything but what I believe needs to be done.
I do not believe that the Trump administration, as it approaches eight days away from its 100th day, that we are doing anything to even remotely scare these people because nobody, but nobody, has been put into a jail or arrested.
Nobody.
Ah, there have been some people fired.
We heard some fired.
Remember the thing that Doge came up with, with, you must list five things that you've done during the week?
That's being refused.
Nobody's doing that.
Or huge swans.
That's going nowhere.
Elon's pretty much saying, thanks a lot.
I gotta go.
Appreciate it.
Have a nice day.
He's moving on.
There's some very good talks about working something out maybe with Russia and Ukraine.
Very frankly, I'll be honest with you, I don't think it's any of our business.
Sorry.
I know nobody wants to hear that.
I know nobody cares to hear that.
But that's their business.
Nobody tells us.
Nobody's going and making deals with us.
You don't hear somebody saying, hey, listen, you're in the middle of problems with, let's say, Iraq.
Excuse me, what?
You're telling us?
No, no, we tell you.
So that's another story.
So let me just say something, my friends.
Everybody said to the day, don't worry, you've got to trust President Trump.
I don't know.
I'm not liking what I'm seeing here.
And you know what I'm saying is true.
I don't like it.
It's taking too long.
It's too long.
It's too slow.
It's too...
What's the word?
It's not scary enough.
It's not decisive enough.
They're not doing the right stuff, okay?
Period.
End of discussion.
But I want to bring something which is more important to you because there is, I think, a globalist need because they just selected an interim head of WEF.
Now that Schwab's gone and with the Pope gone.
By the way, the Pope discussion is just completely psychotic.
Completely psychotic.
Everybody's an expert on Catholicism, on, you know, ex-cathedra matters, canonical precepts, the synod.
Everybody knows everything.
It's the Candace Owens thing.
You know, Candace Owens all of a sudden is an expert in Zionism, Israel, the Grand Rebbe, Lubavitchers, Hasidim.
Oh, she knows everything.
She's an absolute.
She is a genius.
And that's what happens because people become experts in everything.
Johnny Mazzas-Mazz says, has anybody seen FBI Director Patel?
And I don't know.
What about Don Bongino?
Now, let me explain something to you.
If you think that I'm going to sit back, And I'm going to be one of these people that says, oh, no, no, everything the president does is great.
You're out of your mind.
I've seen this happen before.
I don't like what I'm seeing.
Pam Bondi was off to a terrible start.
This is so weird.
How about Kristi Noem walking around with $3,000 in cash?
They stole her purse.
DHS secretary, how do you steal her purse?
This is the most embarrassing thing in the world.
This is nuts.
So we're going to be talking about specifically...
We're one of the most important critical cases before the Supreme Court today for oral arguments, which will want to bring to your attention.
And I want you to make sure you pay attention and listen.
And let us ask ourselves, what are we going to do?
I don't want to spend the rest of my life just sitting around on my ass, just in some weird intellectual circle jerk, just mouthing nonsense about, oh, the liberal, the globalists.
Stop that.
I've been through that.
I want to know what's the president going to do, okay?
Pilgrim says, how many lefty cardinals did the deceased pair on this pope choose?
Just saying, it will be more of the same.
Maybe.
We'll see.
But the thing is, Pilgrim, you don't know anything.
We don't know anything.
And I love you to death, but you don't know shit about the cardinals or the Catholic Church.
And I don't either.
I don't know what they're going on.
We don't know anything.
This isn't the UN.
This is a different world altogether in ways you can't even believe.
But my friends, before we begin, let's talk about this great word from this great American.
You know, when it comes to comfort, support, and a good night's sleep, my friends, my pillow has revolutionized the way millions of Americans rest their heads with unmatched quality, cutting-edge design, and a commitment.
To American-made excellence, MyPillow has become a household name.
And now with MyPillow.com slash Lionel, or using the promo code Lionel, you can unlock exclusive discounts and deals that bring comfort and savings right to your doorstep.
That's right, my friend.
Mike Lindell and the team at MyPillow aren't just selling pillows.
They're on a mission.
A mission to transform the sleep experience.
With a wide variety of products beyond their signature pillows.
Whether you're looking for supportive, adjustable pillows, luxurious Giza Dream sheets, cozy towel, mattress toppers that cradle your body in comfort.
MyPillow offers it all.
And with their 60-day money-back guarantee and a 10-year warranty, you can be confident that MyPillow stands behind every product they sell.
Why MyPillow stands out, let me tell you, unlike generic pillows, you grab off a department store shelf, MyPillow is customizable and engineered to cater to different sleep styles.
Whether you're a side sleeper or a back sleeper or a stomach sleeper, their patented interlocking fill technology adjusts to your specific comfort needs.
Keeping your neck and spine properly aligned throughout the night.
No more waking up with that sore neck.
No more tossing and turning.
Just the restful, rejuvenating and exhilarating sleep that you deserve.
And it doesn't stop the pillows.
MyPillow's Giza Dream Sheets, made from the finest Egyptian cotton, offer a smooth, breathable and luxurious feel.
Turning your bed into a sleep heaven.
So right now, my friends, do the right thing.
Go to MyPillow.com, promo code Lionel.
It's easy for me to say MyPillow.com, promo code Lionel, or call 800-645-4965.
Simply the best.
Trust me.
Now, let me just say this again.
And I saw this last night when I did a...
ABC from 10 to midnight, sitting in.
People don't know anything about the Catholic Church.
A lot of people still love this Pope.
That's fine.
A lot of non-Catholics, for the most part, have this idea that they know something about the Catholic Church, or that they know anything.
They don't know anything about the Catholic Church.
Nothing!
Nothing!
And somebody says, well, you know, the Pope doesn't believe in hell.
He's the Pope!
Where have we been?
Remember when Pope XXIII, Ron Colley, removed the perfidy of the Jews provision and the Easter ritual.
Remember that one?
No.
They went berserk over that.
Who is he?
He's the Pope.
So all of a sudden you get these people at the last minute who weigh in and they're Catholic experts.
All of a sudden.
Out of nowhere.
What do you know about the church?
I don't know anything about the church.
I don't know anything about anything.
I'm just a big mouth, and I just know everything, and I just say things.
Not you, mind you, but everybody else.
So do me a favor.
If you don't know what you're talking about, do us, not you, but just shut up.
You don't know what you're talking about regarding the Catholic Church.
You don't.
I know you think you do, and you...
And you have this idea.
And it's not subject to plebiscite or the Constitution or any of this stuff.
Get it through your head.
Not you, them.
They should get it through their head.
But here is the story which is the most important.
This is really serious.
And pay attention.
And this...
You can go online.
Go to ChatGPT if you want.
Throw this in.
Go to scotusblog.com.
Read this.
Don't listen to me.
Well, listen to me.
I'll kind of direct you.
But after we're done, go read and study on your own.
That's right.
Don't wait for somebody to tell you.
Don't sit back to see what...
I don't know who...
Pick the person you want.
That's not going to work.
But here is the topic, and this is critical.
And Mrs. L is all over this at Lynn's Warriors, okay?
And what could very well be, seriously, and I'm not just using this, a landmark religious liberty case, like you cannot believe.
And these don't come across that often.
SCOTUS, the Supreme Court, is reviewing, having oral arguments today regarding a challenge from religious parents, Who are fighting back against the Maryland School District's decision to,
and this is so important, and we've talked about parental autonomy, parental supremacy, and the like, their decision to force young children to sit through lessons that basically involve LGBTQIA and trans, these books.
Without any opt-out position.
Now, the first thing you do is, when you, let's say you were in a law school class, and I say, Mr. or Mrs. so-and-so, read us the case.
What's the case about?
Give us the style of the case.
Where are we at?
Oral argument.
Oral argument.
I think they're going to decide this in July or something.
What is the issue?
What is the court asking to decide?
What are the grounds?
What are the allegations made to support it one way or the other?
What is the petitioner or the respondent saying?
The petitioner, the one who's appealing it, it would be on the lower court, it would be the appellant or the appellee.
This is the petitioner versus the respondent.
What is the petitioner saying?
What are they claiming?
All the issues about parental autonomy, parental...
Yeah, but under what theory?
Due process, 14th Amendment, First Amendment, what?
Because if you don't give the court the right reason, they're not going to figure it out for you.
They're not going to figure it out for you.
You can go to the Supreme Court and you can give them the wrong...
You can say, okay, we'll overturn this, but why are you saying we should overturn it?
Due process?
No.
Sixth Amendment rights?
No.
This is a First Amendment case.
What First Amendment case?
Free exercise clause.
Not the establishment, free exercise.
And again, people just jump into it because they say, oh, I know about the Supreme Court.
Oh, I know about that.
I don't know if you can see my Supreme Court certificate back there.
You've got to wait five years after you've...
I think mine was 85. You've got to wait five years after you become a member of the bar, and you have to be...
Sponsored by somebody else to be a member of the Supreme Court bar, as it were.
Most people never get to the Supreme Court.
Never.
It's just not that many cases.
They're a court of limited jurisdiction.
They don't hear a lot of stuff.
They normally say, I'm sorry.
We'll let the lower court, the circuit court of appeals, you know, the district court, let them do it.
We're not going to overturn everything unless there's something really serious.
The Supreme Court wants to handle, for example, conflict jurisdiction.
The Fifth Circuit says this.
The Fourth Circuit says this.
The Eleventh Circuit says this.
We have a conflict here.
What's the law?
Okay, we'll resolve it.
Interesting federal question.
Or something that they just think is groovy.
And sometimes the Supreme Court, I'll never forget Newdow.
Oh my God!
Newdow was the case, this was the Pledge of Allegiance case.
This was the one I was waiting for my whole life.
Does the Establishment Clause mean anything?
When we have a courtroom that says, in God we trust, do you think that is the government of the United States basically endorsing a monotheistic deity?
When they say, in God we trust, doesn't that say, in essence, there's a God?
Doesn't that make sense to you?
It makes sense to me.
Don't you think that that's what that is?
When you have on coins in God we trust, isn't the government of the United States saying there's a God?
Don't you think so?
If it has in courtrooms and on coins in God we trust, you don't think that's...
Does that ratify or endorse the notion of a monotheistic deity?
I think so.
What if it says there is no God?
You go into a courtroom and it says there is no God.
We do not trust in God because there is no God.
What would you think about that?
Do you think the government would be violating the establishment clause by ratifying or endorsing the existence or non-existence of a deity?
Don't you think so?
I do.
Wait, the state of New York is saying there is no God?
Wait a minute.
Hold it.
The establishment says you can't pass a law.
The Congress shall pass no law.
And by the way, it's incorporated by reference through the states, through the 14th Amendment.
You know about that.
Baron against Baltimore, incorporation by reference.
You know that.
I know you do.
Because everybody's an expert on this.
But I would say you can't say that.
Why?
Because the government cannot pass judgment.
Okay, fine.
So when Newtown came along, it was about the Pledge of Allegiance.
I thought this is great.
You know what the Supreme Court did?
They took the case.
And then they punted.
They said, we're not going to answer this because New Dow doesn't have any standing.
What?
He doesn't have standing.
He doesn't have standing.
Why?
Because his daughter isn't living with him.
He doesn't have custody of his daughter.
So he was bringing the case on behalf of his daughter.
The Supreme Court said she doesn't live with him.
I said, wait a minute.
Why did you grant this?
Why did you grant cert, certiorari, review?
Why?
You knew you were going to do this, did you?
Or did you just think of it now?
It's the most stupid thing in the world.
So sometimes they'll do stuff, and you'll wonder, why did you do this?
I love the case Schmerber.
Fifth Amendment.
You cannot be compelled to give testimony against yourself.
You think maybe that breath test, does that in any way apply to that?
Does that make any sense to you?
Raul says, I noticed TDS is exaggeratedly vile and meaner.
Oh, it is a progressive disease, my friend.
It is a progressive disease.
Let me ask you this question.
If they tell you, answer the question, where were you?
I don't have to answer you.
Why?
Fifth Amendment.
Oh, okay.
Okay, who were you with?
I'm not going to answer you.
Oh, yeah, Fifth Amendment.
Are the rights remain silent?
I can have a lawyer present.
Okay.
Okay, listen, we think you've been drinking and driving.
Really?
Yeah.
We want to take your breath.
Oh, no, no, no, no.
I'm going to take the fifth.
What?
I'm going to take the fifth because my breath is kind of like my testimony because without the breath, you can't, you can't prosecute me.
And if you can't prosecute me, you can't, you know, and you need the breath.
This is, this is probably better.
You don't even need to ask me anything.
Take my breath and you got the case.
I'm not going to take my breath.
I'm not going to The Supreme Court in Schmerber against California said, this is non-testimonial.
What?
The Fifth Amendment is about testimonial.
You know, viva voce or you saying something.
Not your breath.
Not standing in a lineup.
Not fingerprints.
Hair samples.
That's not testimonial.
It's not, but that's what you need to do.
Without that, you can't prosecute me.
Anyway, so it does these things.
And most of the people that I meet, they've never read a case in their life.
They have no idea.
They've never read what?
Or read the concurring and the dissents and the concurring apart, descending apart, you know, PCAs and all.
There's a lot to it.
But oh no, people are experts.
They're experts.
Candace Owens knows all about Lubavitcher.
She knows all about Judaism.
She knows all about the grand rubbish because she took two or three quotes because she's an expert.
Let's see what she said about Kanye West.
She's full of shit, but that's okay.
She's interesting.
How about this thing we're going through right now about, do you think that Douglas Murray and Dave Smith, are you still, they're still talking about Douglas Murray on Joe Rogan?
They're still talking about it.
It's over.
What are you talking about?
This is the most stupid thing.
Charlie Kirk's with Bill Maher.
Bill Maher.
It's like, what is going on?
So I just say, okay, next, next, next.
That's boring.
That's boring.
Let's find out somebody who knows what's going on in the world.
And I look around and I say, me!
So let me tell you what happened today.
Oral arguments.
Oral arguments are great.
And frankly, oral arguments don't mean anything.
Because they have...
They have said, well, those are the oral arguments, and my God, we know for a fact that they're going to say, no, they're not.
Or they think that Amy Coney Barrett is somehow a traitor, or that Roberts is a traitor because he ruled against the TRO, or no, he allowed the temporary restraining order, or the injunction.
They don't know anything!
They think he's a traitor, and he...
They even went after the ins of court.
Alex Jones, bless his heart, went after the ins of court.
I joined the ins of court when they first started, oh God, 40 years ago.
I had to quit.
I was so bored.
It's like, this is the most boring thing.
Because a lot of lawyers bore the hell out of me.
Really and truly.
And some judges are good, but a lot of them are just...
This is not a barrel of laughs.
Because most lawyer stuff is wonky.
It's not what you think.
It's just, it's really kind of dry.
And yet, in some respects, that's kind of the interesting stuff.
So this case, this case is the most important.
And here's what you should do.
I want you to go to scotusblog.org.
Let's go to scotusblog.org.
This is the best one available.
And there's a great one.
Front page.
Front page.
Supreme Court considers parents' rights efforts to exempt children from books with the LGBTQ themes.
I just did a video on that.
Please follow up.
And it is Mahmoud against Taylor.
This is Oral Arguments Today.
Okay, so what's it about?
Absolutely one of the most important critical, really, really, and I'm not just saying this, one of the most important cases regarding religious liberty, and every parent, every conservative, and every whatever should pay attention to it.
SCOTUS is reviewing a challenge from religious parents who are, I think for a good word, fighting back against a Maryland school district's decision to force young children, as young as four, Forcing them to sit through lessons involving LGBTQ and LGBTQ-themed books and the like without any opt-out opinion.
Let me tell you something.
The parents are not saying, we don't think you should do this.
We don't want to use taxpayers' money.
We're just saying we want to be able to opt out.
We want our kids not to be there.
That's all when it comes to this.
Everything else, you have your...
Have your class.
We don't want to do it.
Remember during the flag debates, you can't force a kid to stand in the Pledge of Allegiance.
You can't.
You should not be able to force a kid to listen to this.
That would be the case at Mahmoud.
M-A-H-M-O-U-D.
It's either Mahmoud or Mahmoud.
I'm giving you the...
against Taylor.
And it stems from Montgomery County, Maryland.
This is where the school board...
In 2022, introduced a series or a set of picture books promoting LGBTQ themes, including Pride Puppy.
How about that?
And Uncle Bobby's Wedding.
There you go.
So they introduced that into the curriculum for children as young as, here we go, four years old.
These books feature same-sex couples.
They celebrate Pride Parade.
And all under the guise of inclusivity.
Now the parents who brought this were Muslim, Catholic, and Ukrainian Orthodox.
Okay?
They didn't object to the existence of the books.
They didn't say you can't have them.
But they did object to being denied the right to excuse their children from content.
That they believe conflicts with their deeply held religious beliefs.
Does that make sense to you?
Of course it does.
Under what theory?
First Amendment.
Normally, First Amendment people think of the right to say something versus the right not to hear something.
But they're being denied the right to say something in that I want my child to be spared from this.
So, There was no warning, no choice, no opt-out.
Now listen to this.
Originally, the district had allowed parents, you're going to love this, to opt out of such lessons.
Originally.
So they did it, somehow.
But in 2023, they got the word.
In 2023, the Montgomery County School Board of Education, they all of a sudden, abruptly, And all of a sudden, just overnight, reversed his policy, eliminating the parental notification and the opt-out option entirely.
Why?
Ready for this?
Why?
Why'd they give?
Why'd they change it?
How come you could opt out before, but now, why?
They claimed it was too, quote, logistically challenging, unquote.
Whatever the hell that means.
And he accused parents of being bigoted if they objected.
I shite you not.
So let that sink in.
Faithful parents, committed parents, good parents, devout parents, who simply wanted to raise their children according to their beliefs, were being equated, yet again, to white supremacists, only because they said, we just want our children to opt out from this.
If you had a class that says, there was no God, atheism around the world, or if there was something that said, We believe that LGBT is unnatural.
Don't you think, then, gay parents should allow their children to opt out of that?
Of course!
This is established.
But wait, there's more.
So this is not education.
This is coercion.
This is what we should be talking to today.
This is the most important thing.
This is so critical.
Because the right of parents, Mrs. L talks about it and we talk about it all the time, the right of parents to control the environment and the destiny of their children is another story.
Anyway, so parents go to court and they're fighting for their rights and they're represented by the Beckett Fund for Religious Liberty.
So the parents sued and they cited a clear violation of their First Amendment rights.
They argue that, and this is critical, that being forced to expose their children To teachings on sexuality and gender identity without their consent compels them to violate their religious principles.
This isn't about banning books.
Let me say this again.
It is not about banning books.
It's about letting parents decide what is age appropriate for their kids to be able to allow them the freedom of speech Their freedom of speech, their freedom of expression, to have their religious liberty not be violated by a school board which doesn't even give their impressionable children the right to opt out.
I mean, after all, if parents can't decide when to introduce those topics, who can?
Remember, as little as four years old.
But the lower courts, of course, sided with the school district.
Oh, yeah.
And both the Federal District Court and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, they brushed off the whole argument and the parents' request for even a temporary restraining order, a TRO, a temporary injunction.
Now, you know this guy, bold, broad, whatever, they're granting them left and right when it comes to illegal aliens, deporting them.
Arresting them.
They don't, you don't even have to ask.
Want one of these?
Want one?
Yeah, okay.
You got it.
And the courts are reviewing, after all of this, the courts are reviewing whether, how do I say this?
The courts are reviewing the, whether the due process provision of this was met or satisfied.
They're not going through the underlying Substantive issue about whether you can remove somebody or not.
But they grant them left and right.
Here, they said, nope, not even an injunction.
And the key is, the standard is irreparable harm.
You mean to tell me that the court would say, wait a minute, if these people are claiming that this is absolutely 100% contrary to their particular belief system, if that is true, if that is true, then we're going to grant an injunction, at least, until we get to sort this out.
The judges, in this case before, insisted that exposure to ideas doesn't amount to coercion.
You see what they're saying?
And that's the whole thing.
They're saying, we're not asking the kids to affirm anything.
We're not asking them to say, LGBT is bad.
We just want them to listen.
And the parents are saying, we never said you were asking to or coercing them to affirm or somehow to adopt or ratify.
Or endorse some particular way of thinking.
That's not what we're saying.
We don't want them to hear it.
Do you understand what's going on?
Like I said, under the flag cases, you can't compel a kid to pay fealty or homage to the flag.
So tell that to the parents who feel bullied out of their own children's education.
Now remember, they care nothing about reading rates.
If you look at Baltimore, talk about Maryland, look at Baltimore, kids can't even read.
They don't care about that.
Nobody's going to court about whether teachers are even teaching.
No, but this bothers them.
So now it's up to the Supreme Court.
So, the court's going to be hearing oral arguments, and the implications couldn't be bigger.
This is huge.
The question is, and this is the issue, can a school district override religious freedom and parental rights under the guise of diversity?
At first they said, well...
How do I say this?
We provided for it.
Yes, they could opt out before, but now they can't because of logistical problems.
That's just nonsense.
Now, the parents, they're using a case, they're relying heavily, on Wisconsin against Yoder.
This is where the court ruled that Amish families Could withdraw children from school past the 8th grade to protect their religious traditions, to allow them to opt out.
You see what I'm saying?
They also, this is a great, there's a case of Lukumi Babalu against the city of Hialeah.
This is a 1993 Santeria case.
And it said, It said that it was ruled unconstitutional because they had all these santerros and santeria and brujaria and they were doing all this animal sacrifice.
So the court said you cannot target somebody.
You cannot target a group or a religion specifically.
The law has to apply to everybody.
If everybody doesn't work on Sunday, or everybody can't go to the liquor store, or everybody can't, that's one thing.
Certain people is a different story.
So in this Babalu case, this was terrific, the court ruled, wait a minute, animal sacrifice?
Yeah.
You have a statute that charges animal sacrifice?
Yeah.
What about hunting?
Why is hunting okay?
Why is eating meat okay?
You went after these Santeria people, didn't you?
Or Santeria.
You used this targeting them.
That's what this was about.
So you have to ask yourself kind of how this thing balances.
So the court said that policies targeting religious practices are unconstitutional if they're not neutral or if they're not generally applicable.
Now, in this case, the school board allowed opt-outs for family life and human sexuality lessons in the past, just not for LGBTQ content.
So you hear what I'm saying?
This was a very interesting story.
If you had something that they found objectionable, or if you didn't like it about, let's say, contraception things, or talks about sexuality itself, You know, human sexual behavior.
You could opt out.
Not this time.
Not this time.
Why?
Because it's LGBTQ.
So what they're doing was, this was deliberately targeted.
This is what they're suggesting.
They're deliberately targeting this, forcing them.
You can opt out about everything else, but not this.
I'll bet you you could opt out if there was a health class on meat and you were vegan or or I'll bet you anything if there was a class that said that AIDS and certain communicable STDs are more prevalent in the gay community.
I bet you you could opt out for that.
But pro-gay, pro-LGBT, which Acted as a...
How do I say this?
As a...
What am I saying?
Something that is a proponent, they didn't like that.
So that's selective.
And that's biased.
And it's wrong.
And that's going to be their thing.
And I feel very good that this conservative court is going to probably get to the bottom of this.
So, this also goes to show you government arrogance on full display.
I mean, I can't even say this enough.
In a brief that was supporting the parents, the Trump administration stated the obvious.
And this is what's good.
This is from the Solicitor General, so to speak.
Denying the parents, or denying parents, any say in what their kids are exposed to, in effect, forces them to choose between their faith and the public school system.
Acting Solicitor General Sarah Harris said, that, that is textbook interference with the free exercise of religion.
You cannot impede somebody.
Now, free exercise clauses are the most fantastic cases.
They had the case one time of an MTA.
This is a subway worker who was a Sikh.
Who had to wear a turban, or whatever the particular name of it is.
But the rules, OSHA demanded that they wear hard hats, which didn't fit.
And also, that without a hard hat, the turban itself could become caught in the gears.
How do you deal with that?
Do I see?
The hell with you.
Screw you.
You want to work for the MTA?
I don't know.
This involves balancing tests.
There was a time years ago, I remember this, in law school we had Brother Love.
He was part of the Zion Coptics.
They wanted to smoke marijuana.
This was when it was real marijuana, not this skunk crap you're smoking.
Anyway, this guy came to our law school and I remember listening to him.
I said, why is it that Certain drugs are prohibited.
Marijuana, peyote, but during prohibition, wine, no problem.
So it's a fascinating subject for thee and not for me.
So meanwhile, as we speak to school boards, defense is predictable.
They're saying they claim their policy is neutral.
That no student is forced to affirm anything.
And this is the part.
That you've got to understand.
Nobody is saying that they're affirming.
They're listening to this.
And they also alleged that letting parents opt out would shred public education.
Translation, we know what's best for your kids.
You don't shut up.
It's incredible.
They don't care anything about reading or writing.
Again, Baltimore is the worst of the worst of the worst.
The board, even worse, argued that it's not enough for parents to feel their religious beliefs are under attack.
They must prove literal coercion or punishment.
Not that you're being forced to endure this, to listen to this.
If I had...
If I let kids listen to lectures on why the black race is genetically and intellectually inferior, and you had to listen to this, and I'm saying, I'm not asking you to affirm this.
I'm not asking you to pledge fealty to this.
We're not saying you did, but what are you talking about?
So apparently, being told your child will be read stories.
That contradict and can contaminate their own sense of right or wrong, but that contradict your core faith values, that doesn't count.
So this is why I'm telling you.
If you think the radical left is gone, or if you think that, well, they're going to get some, and there is some talk about this very interesting black, he's from Guinea, I'm not sure, but this black, African Cardinal Sarah, he's released something.
So, if you think that, I mean, it could be, I don't know, what they do among the Cardinals, I have no idea.
Anyway, the backlash is now growing nationwide, and this is a huge story.
So, across the country, parents are watching very, very closely to what happens, and in July or June, when the decision comes out.
If the court rules against these families, it could set a chilling, frightening, horrible precedent.
Will schools be able to slip more ideological content into classrooms?
Drag queen shows?
We're not forcing you to adopt or affirm them, but you're going to have to watch these dystopian John Waters, you know, divine performances.
Is there any regard for religious objections?
Anything at all?
Anything?
Do you think that maybe if all of a sudden Jewish kids are forced to listen to stories about how Jesus I know this might be more of a direct, but let's just assume how Jesus was put to death by the Jews and the Caiaphas and the Sanhedrin What?
Do you think that It's just your ability to say, excuse me, I'm not opting out of math.
I'm not opting out of, you know, science.
That might be interesting, too.
What if you don't believe in evolution?
I mean, it could get sketchy.
I think it's very simple.
You can opt out.
You're a parent.
You can't even use Quell.
If a kid comes to a teacher and says, And the teacher says, oh, there's nits in your hair.
I can't use Quell.
You've got to get out of here.
I can't give you an aspirin.
I can't do anything.
I can't touch your child.
I didn't get the okay.
We can't even go on a field trip without a burglar.
But I can make you sit there and hear about Johnny's got a father.
Kids are coming home and telling their parents, I don't want to be like you and Daddy.
I want to be like Uncle.
No, no, this is nuts.
Conservatives see a very broader, very simple pattern here.
This woke ideology, this lunacy, is being forced into every corner, every crevice of public life.
And while traditional values and traditional ideologies are being mocked and marginalized, we're saying no!
The radical left claims this is about inclusion.
What about their inclusion not to, well, no, I think it's about exclusion.
We want our kids to be excluded from this.
Remember, again, I say it repeatedly, they're not saying don't teach this.
But where's the inclusion for Christian, Muslim, Orthodox, Ukrainian?
You love the Ukrainians, right?
Notwithstanding the Azov Battalion in the right sector, and the neo-Nazis and the followers of Stepan Bandera, but that notwithstanding, are you kidding me?
And what about people who just want to raise their kids without...
Government indoctrination.
I don't give a damn whether you believe it or not.
I believe that there are parents.
Parents.
I mean, I really stand for parents and their belief.
I mean, I will go pretty far.
Then it gets tough sometimes.
What about parents who don't believe in, you know, diabetes, medication, you know, that kind of stuff.
That's difficult to say.
Anyway, the court's conservative majority holds the key, and this is what's critical.
With the conservative-leaning Supreme Court, and they're still there, many, I think, rightfully and hopefully believe that the tide could turn.
If the justices uphold the parents' rights, it could force school boards across the country to rethink curriculum policies, reinstate opt-out provisions.
That's all it is.
But a ruling in favor of this school district, this could embolden and empower left-wing radical lunatics pushing even more radical material into elementary schools.
Remember, in this case, kids as little as four years old, leaving, in essence, families powerless.
Samuel Alito, who has become the real powerhouse, who knows for his strong religious stance on On liberty and the like.
He hinted at this concern during prior instances, and he was questioning whether the policy really respects diverse religious traditions.
Amy Coney Barrett, whom some people on the right have just dismissed as being a lunatic, some crypto-lefty, asked whether the policy would allow any exceptions for religious belief.
And it's clear that at least some members of the court see this not as a simple education issue, but, this is the most important, a constitutional issue.
It's about parental rights, parental supremacy, and the like.
So the question is, what's at stake?
And listen carefully.
I don't care whether you have kids or don't have kids, it doesn't really matter.
It's something bigger.
Because this also we can put into...
Extrapolation when it comes to COVID and biomedical martial law and biomedical autonomy and the like.
But this isn't about Montgomery County.
This is about whether America still respects this thing called religious freedom and parental authority, parental autonomy, parental primacy.
Whether the state will dictate what your children or children must learn, believe, and accept by not regarding kind of stayed Prototypically, you know, usual curricula, such as math and reading, but LGBTQ?
What?
It's about whether public schools serve families or steamroll them into some kind of weird subjugation or indoctrination process.
It's about whether, and this is important, irrespective of what you believe, but it's about whether faith still matters in public square.
It's about whether it trumps It's about administrative, ministerial tyranny, if you will.
And it's about whether conservatives and religious adherents are willing to stand up and say, enough is enough.
We've had enough of this.
So, the decision they think is, I think, expected by the end of June or early July.
Until then, people like Mrs. L and I are watching across America.
Waiting and hoping that the Constitution and common sense will prevail.
Now understand something.
Remember this.
This has nothing to do with faith.
I've said this repeatedly.
Not that I'm proud of it.
I'm just trying to clarify.
I am not of faith.
I have no interest in this because of the Bible or God.
That's not it.
The point is, who runs the show?
Now, could this perhaps allow a parent to opt out from certain...
Portrayals of history?
Maybe.
What if there was a teacher who said that slavery was the result of a childish kind of a simpleton race of people allowing themselves to be subjected to this subjugation and the like?
That these people, these slaves, are really just kind of stupid people, and they were basically sold or set up by their own black...
And you say, whoa, whoa, wait a minute, hold it!
Teaching slavery is one thing, but that?
I don't want my kid to hear that.
I don't want my kid to hear that.
Do you have the right to opt out?
I think so.
What if there was a teacher who said that Donald Trump is the worst president ever?
You don't think you have some say?
I think you should be able to, in some respects, just shut the whole school down.
But that's not what we're saying.
You don't think that you can say, wait a minute.
I'm sorry, this is not long division.
Why are you even talking about that?
I want my kid to read and know how to do math and know how to, you know, be proficient and know some modicum of socialized skills.
But not this.
This is ridiculous.
So my friends, pay deep, deep, deep and careful attention to this.
This is absolutely critical.
Pilgrim says parents could search out homeschooling co-ops, which is also, but a lot of people remember, there are folks, some women have, people have two jobs, they don't have a lot of money, a lot of resources.
I'm tired of always saying, well, you can opt out.
Well, you can do this.
Well, you don't have to.
You can go elsewhere.
Wait a minute.
They're taxpayers.
Why don't they have a say?
I don't understand this.
There was something recently where a while back we went to a Catholic school.
And it was a Catholic school.
Remember that, honey?
They had about Roe against Wade, and after Dobbs came out, and they had these big posters on buildings.
A Catholic school, a Catholic private school, basically, in support of abortion?
The Pope made it very clear.
Did I read that right?
It was after the Dobbs case.
Remember that?
Now, whether you like it or not, that's House rule.
And there's one thing about Bergoglio.
He was pretty adamant about abortion.
And by the way, that was considered a mortal sin.
And you can get excommunicated for an abortion, believe it or not.
Though they haven't done that in a while.
So it comes down to this, my friends.
It's about house rules.
That simple.
So, Pilgrim and Raul, thank you so much.
And Johnny, Maz, the spaz, thank you.
And thank you for listening.
Make sure, make sure you pay very deep attention, very clear attention to Mrs. L and Lynn's Warriors.
Follow her on YouTube.
She has interviews that are absolutely scintillating.
And I don't use that term lightly.
Follow her at LinzWarriors.
Also, follow her on YouTube.
Not YouTube.
Well, YouTube, yes.
But X for LinzWarriors as well.
Christian Janus, by the way, in a form of monetary unit that nobody's ever heard of, Filipino Cougarans, says, Our teacher told us that slaves had to exaggerate their condition in order to receive sympathy from the northerners.
Well, I can see that going.
The Alex Haley contingent would not necessarily have appreciated that.
But I thank you, sir.
All right, so follow her on X on YouTube.
And also make sure you go to our...
I have a brand new video coming up on our sister station.
Ours at Lionel Legal.
And make sure you are still subscribed to Lionel Nation.
Alright, dear friends.
Have a great and a glorious day.
Thank you so much for being a part of this.
Thank you so much for this.
Have a beauteous day.
And until then, remember, the monkey's dead.
The show's over.
Sue ya.
▲
Export Selection