Today on the Matt Walsh Show, police in North Carolina broke up a peaceful protest and arrested protestors who had gone to the state capital to speak out against the governor’s shut down order. The police department explained that protesting “is not essential.” I very much disagree. I’ll explain why. Also, Five Headlines, including Attorney General Barr siding with churchgoers in Mississippi who were fined for attending a drive in service. And at the end of the show I want to tell you about the most incredible and inspiring email I’ve ever received from a reader. You’ll want to hear this story.
Check out The Cold War: What We Saw, a new podcast written and presented by Bill Whittle at https://bit.ly/2z2j1NB. In Part 1 we peel back the layers of mystery cloaking the Terror state run by the Kremlin, and watch as America takes its first small steps onto the stage of world leadership.
If you like The Matt Walsh Show, become a member TODAY with promo code: WALSH and enjoy the exclusive benefits for 10% off at https://www.dailywire.com/Walsh
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
Today on the Matt Wall Show, police in North Carolina broke up a peaceful protest and arrested protesters who had gone to the state capitol to speak out against the governor's shutdown orders, and the police department explained that they were breaking up the protest and arresting people because protesting is, quote, not essential.
I very much disagree with that, and I think there's a discussion we need to have about this word essential.
And what does it mean exactly?
And who has the authority, really, to decide what's essential and what isn't?
So we're going to talk about all that coming up.
Also, five headlines, including Attorney General Barr, speaking of our essential rights, is siding with churchgoers in Mississippi who were fined for attending a church service on Easter.
And at the end of the show, I want to tell you about the most incredible email I think I've ever received from a reader.
And this is, well, it's a story you're going to want to hear, so stick around for that.
All that coming up.
But to start with, like I said, a group of peaceful protesters gathered in Raleigh, North Carolina on Tuesday to call for the reopening of the state.
They stood outside.
They observed the guidelines of social distancing.
They were, you know, more than six feet apart.
More importantly, though, they observe the guidelines of the First Amendment, which, plain as day, protects, quote, the right of the people peaceably to assemble and to petition the government for redress of grievances.
That's what the First Amendment says.
They were assembled, they were peaceful, and they were petitioning their government for a specific and reasonable thing, namely the right to go back to work and feed their families.
That is their grievance, I think a very justifiable grievance, and they were petitioning the government.
So it seems like they had all of the First Amendment bases covered, right?
But they seem to have forgotten, as many of us I guess have forgotten, that our Founding Fathers apparently, when codifying our inherent human rights into the legal document known as the Bill of Rights, included the important caveat that all of this stuff evaporates and is a moot point if there is a virus and people are getting sick.
So it's all, you know, you have a right to peaceful assembly, you have a right to speech and religion and everything else, unless people are getting sick, in which case this is all meaningless.
Now, it's easy to forget that it's in there because it was apparently written in invisible ink, and you can only read it if you have a special decoder lens that you're looking through.
And actually, I'm not sure if that's true or not, that at least appears to be the legal theory of the governor of North Carolina and his law enforcement agents as Raleigh Police descended upon this peaceful assembly and instructed it to disperse.
At least one of the protesters was arrested.
Now, when asked to justify their actions, the Raleigh Police Department explained on Twitter that, and this is a direct quote, they said, protesting is a non-essential activity.
And in case you think that maybe this is just some intern or, you know, who knows, whoever is the person who updates the Raleigh Police Department Twitter, I don't know who that is, and you might think, well, that's just that person going rogue and making this statement.
Lest you think that, the Raleigh Police Department issued a statement in response to the backlash over all of this, and they doubled down on this, the First Amendment is not essential thing.
This is what they said.
The goal of the Raleigh Police Department is to help residents remain as safe as possible during the COVID-19 pandemic by reminding them to observe the Wake County State Home Proclamation and the Governor's Executive Orders.
In these unprecedented times and unusual circumstances, both the Governor and the County have declared a state of emergency.
Under these current and temporary declarations, protesting is not listed as an essential function.
Well, there you have it.
The Bill of Rights.
The Governor did not list the Bill of Rights as essential.
And so therefore, it is not.
Because the governor decides.
Now, I quite expect the bootlickers out there who have already supported the government's right to arrest people for going to church, I expect that camp, the bootlicking camp, will find this reasoning totally acceptable.
But good Americans who value freedom And am I saying that you're a bad American if you support the government's right to arrest people for peaceably protesting?
Yeah, I am.
I'm saying you're a very bad American, in fact.
And I'm ashamed to call you a countryman.
I really am.
If you would support this.
I'm not saying you're a bad American if you support quarantines and shutdowns in general.
But if you're going to side with the government, arresting people for clearly exercising their First Amendment rights, then you're a bad American.
Those, though, Americans who value freedom will recognize all of this as the Orwellian insanity that it is.
If a politician can unilaterally abolish our fundamental liberties simply by declaring them non-essential, then we have no fundamental liberties.
The whole idea becomes a farce, or at best it's a sort of symbolic concept that we sing about, and we write poems about, and that makes us feel good inside, but really it has no practical applications.
It doesn't matter, this is the point, all this stuff about essential, this word essential is being bandied about quite a bit.
It doesn't matter if a particular protest or church service is essential.
That's a matter of opinion anyway.
And the opinion of a politician or a bureaucrat or the governor should have no more weight on a matter like this than anybody else's opinion.
Because they're not supposed to be governing based on their opinion.
We are not supposed to be under the rule of our governor's opinion.
But that's not the point when it comes to essential.
The point is that the right to protest, just like the right to practice our religion, is essential.
The government has claimed absolute authority to decree what is essential and what is not, but when it claims this authority for itself, we have to remember that the word essential has two definitions that are related but not exactly the same.
So the first definition is something is essential if it's necessary or it's indispensable or, you know, if it's like a physical necessity, okay?
So that's like we might say drinking water is essential.
And yes, it's true that in that sense, going to a protest or going to church is not like drinking water.
It's not because you could not do those things and you're not going to die.
But then there's the second definition.
And under that definition, essential means pertaining to or constituting the essence of a thing.
In other words, inherent.
Something is essential if it's inherent.
And in that sense, in the deeper sense of essential, there is no doubt that our right to protest and our right to practice our religion publicly is essential, in that it is inherent to our nature as human beings.
It is in our essence as human beings.
Essential.
Governments across the country have used the fact that these rights are not physical necessities as an excuse to deny the essentialness of these rights to our basic human nature.
They are denying the doctrine upon which our country was founded.
And that should really concern us.
That the governor can overturn that in one fell swoop just by issuing an executive order.
The whole point, the whole point of our country, the reason it exists in the first place is that you cannot overturn those rights.
They are always there.
And they're always essential.
Now, there's another important point about North Carolina specifically and the situation that it's in, and we'll talk about that in just a second.
But first, I want to give a thank you to this sponsor and all of our sponsors who are supporting the show during this very difficult time.
It's difficult for everybody.
And I want to say it's all the listeners and thank you as well for supporting the show and supporting The Daily Wire in general and keep keeping us going.
And if you, you know, it just I appreciate everyone who listens to these little ads we do.
And if you have have the money and you hear something about about a product that you really like and you think that you could use, I would ask and encourage you to to support that sponsor and thank everyone who does.
All right, I want to tell you about our friends over at Paint Your Life, you know, having artwork in the house.
I know when I was a bachelor living on my own for five or six years, One of the ways you could tell is a bachelor pad is there's no art of any kind on the walls it's just There's random like stains and smudges and things on the walls, but there was no no no artwork or anything But when you want to have a nice home especially with a family and everything you want to have some artwork And that's that's and you want the artwork to be meaningful to you to be beautiful and meaningful and that's why you need paint your life if you're looking for a way to feel connected to your loved ones and
Especially when you can't be near them like we can't be right now.
You've got to try PaintYourLife.com.
You can get a professional hand-painted portrait created from any photo at a truly affordable price.
This is not like some Photoshop thing.
This is you're sending in the photo, of course digitally, and they're going to have real artists Good artists actually paint this thing, and I'll tell you one thing I like about it is it's a very hands-on process.
So through the entire process of them painting it, they're going to keep you updated, and if there's any questions, if you have anything you want to customize or change, they're going to do that for you.
Very responsive, and I just cannot recommend it enough.
Right now, as a limited time offer, you get 30% off your painting.
That's right, 30% off of an already affordable price, plus you get free shipping.
So to get this special offer, text the word Matt to 64000.
That's Matt, M-A-T-T, to 64000.
All right, one other point about North Carolina as they're, you know, trying to overturn the First Amendment.
North Carolina has 5,000 confirmed cases of coronavirus and a little over 400 hospitalizations.
That's in a state of 10 million people spread out over 100 counties.
And its coronavirus death toll, as of yesterday, was 108.
So you're talking about an average of slightly more than one death per county.
Now, those numbers equal a sad situation and a serious situation, but they do not equal a cataclysmic emergency.
North Carolina, like most of the states in the Union, has never had a coronavirus emergency.
And even if an emergency could justify the suspension of our fundamental human rights, which it can't, in my view, but even if it could, this, for North Carolina, would not be such an emergency.
So, what the governor is doing is exploiting the virus and the fear that it generates to seize unprecedented power, and this is what we're seeing across the country.
And we absolutely should not stand for it.
All right, let's go on to headlines.
Number one, as mentioned before, headline from The Hill says, Attorney General Barr says government may not impose special restrictions on religious gatherings.
Reading now from the article, it says, Attorney General William Barr said Tuesday that the government, quote, may not impose special restrictions on religious gatherings as churches across the country raise eyebrows with large in-person ceremonies conducted against the advice of health officials.
A little bit of a... You could tell the writer of this article, you could tell how they felt about it.
Barr emphasized recommendations from federal health officials that people practice social distancing and avoid large gatherings, noting that the Constitution does allow some temporary restrictions on our liberties that would not be tolerated in normal circumstances.
But even in times of emergency, when reasonable and temporary restrictions are placed on our rights, the First Amendment and federal statutory law prohibit discrimination against religious institutions and religious believers.
Thus, government may not impose special restrictions On religious activity that do not also apply to similar non-religious activity.
And then he filed a memo in support of the congregants who were fined in Mississippi $500 for attending a drive-in service.
So, look, I'm glad for this letter from Barr.
I'm especially glad that he came out in defense of the church in Mississippi.
But the problem with this caveat of may not impose special restrictions that don't also apply to other places is that it clearly gives the government an out.
All they have to do is claim that they're restricting churches the same way they're restricting other, quote, non-essential places.
And that's why the real issue, again, the real thing that we have to talk about and that has to be addressed is the government's authority to declare something non-essential in the first place.
Because that's what this comes down to.
Number two, Barack Obama has finally come out after all this time to endorse his quote, good friend, Joe Biden.
I'm so proud to endorse Joe Biden for president of the United States.
Choosing Joe to be my vice president was one of the best decisions I ever made.
And he became a close friend.
And I believe Joe has all the qualities we need in a president right now.
He's someone whose own life has taught him how to persevere, how to bounce back when you've been knocked down.
When Joe talks with parents who've lost their jobs, we hear the son of a man who once knew the pain of having to tell his children that he'd lost his.
I know he'll surround himself with good people.
Experts, scientists, military officials, who actually know how to run the government, and care about doing a good job running the government, and know how to work with our allies, and who will always put the American people's interests above their own.
Very interesting.
So Biden has knowledge, experience, empathy, grace.
He's a great leader, close friend.
Obama, one of the best things he's ever done in his life is appoint Joe Biden vice president.
All of that, but you didn't endorse him until he was the only option left on the table.
He's the best guy.
I mean, you couldn't ask for a better guy.
Great leader, everything.
But yeah, I had to wait until he was the only... He's also the only option I have right now.
So, that's like if the team captain picks you last in gym class and then tells you later that he selected you for your great athleticism and skill.
You know, it just doesn't... It's not very convincing.
Number three, headline on NPR.com says, New York City's COVID-19 death toll soars past 10,000.
That sounds bad, and it is.
But then you have to actually read the article, and then you see this.
New York City has drastically increased its estimate of the number of people killed by COVID-19 to include probable victims who were not tested.
The new number is 10,367.
It continues, for weeks, firefighters and paramedics have been recording a massive spike in deaths at home around New York City.
The deceased were presumed to be victims of the coronavirus, but were never tested.
Now city officials have recalculated the toll that the virus has taken and reached a staggering number, adding nearly 4,000 to the total.
So, what they're telling us is that they reached this staggering toll because they're adding in people who did not test positive for coronavirus.
They're just assuming that these people died of coronavirus.
Okay, but we're still told, you know, you can't claim that they are artificially inflating the death toll.
If you claim that, you're a horrible person, you're a conspiracy monger, right?
Even though they're telling us pretty much, that's exactly what they're doing.
And on the basis that, you know, they say paramedics have recorded a massive spike in deaths at home around New York City.
Okay, I don't deny that there obviously is a coronavirus outbreak in New York City, and it's really bad.
You don't need to inflate the death toll.
In reality, it's a very bad situation.
And there obviously are going to be people who die at home from this virus, tragically.
But if you think about it, why is there a massive spike of people dying at home?
What could be another contributing factor?
Well, maybe it's that people are locked in their homes.
Okay, so when you lock people in their homes all day for weeks on end, you're going to have more people dying at home.
Whereas, on a normal circumstance, maybe they would have died somewhere else.
Okay, so that also has to have something to do with it.
And you're going to have people who would have died anyway, and died for reasons that have nothing to do with coronavirus, die at home.
And if you show up and just assume they died of coronavirus, then you're going to end up with an artificially inflated death toll.
Number four, a headline in the Daily Wire.
U.S.
officials raised alarm about Wuhan lab researching bat coronaviruses in 2018.
Military investigating.
This is pretty incredible, so listen to this.
A bombshell report from the Washington Post on Tuesday revealed that U.S.
officials sounded the alarm about the Wuhan Institute of Virology back in 2018 over safety concerns as the lab researched coronavirus from bats.
The Washington Post says, in January 2018, the U.S.
Embassy in Beijing took the unusual step of repeatedly sending U.S.
science diplomats to the Wuhan Institute of Virology, which had in 2015 become China's first laboratory to achieve the highest level of international bioresearch safety.
What the U.S.
officials learned during their visits concerned them so much, they dispatched two diplomatic cables categorized as sensitive but unclassified back to Washington.
I mean, you can go to Washington Post and read the entire report.
The point is, there's very real concern here, obviously.
And I think about, there were a lot of people, myself included, I certainly wasn't the only person, A lot of just normal, common-sense people who, weeks ago, were saying, it's probably not a coincidence that you've got this global pandemic that started in a place where, sitting right there at the center of it, is this virus lab.
Probably not a coincidence.
There are coincidences in life, but when something seems like it's probably not a coincidence, most of the time it's not.
And those of us who weeks ago were pointing this out and saying, hey, you know, what about that virus lab?
Does that maybe have something to do with this?
Weeks ago, we were told by the experts and the media that we're a bunch of conspiracy theorists and we're stupid and they scolded us.
And now we're being told that, oh, yeah, you know what?
Actually, yeah, it might be that.
So there's been a lot of that happening, in fact, also with masks.
You think back a month ago, there were people, just common sense, normal people, buying masks and saying, maybe we should wear masks.
And again, we were scolded by the experts, including the Surgeon General, saying masks isn't going to do anything for you, you moron, stop wearing masks.
Fast forward a month, and now they're saying, oh yeah, you know what, about those masks, maybe you were right about that.
Turns out that common sense once again prevails.
Before we move on to the last headline, I want to tell you about our friends over at Duke Cannon.
Maybe you've had this experience as a man looking for body washes, and so many of the body washes that you find at the store are very disappointing.
They're just sort of thin and watery, flowery, feminine.
It's not what you need as a man when it comes to... You need a manly body wash.
Luckily enough, there's a new product from Duke Cannon Supply Company called Thick.
Thick is three times thicker than common body washes.
It's the high-viscosity... I don't even know what high-viscosity means, but it sounds good.
It's the high-viscosity alternative to watching your money run down the shower drain.
Thick comes in a big old container.
You crack it open like a can of beer.
Like you crack open a can of beer in the shower.
I know I have a beer.
In the shower every morning.
It's how I get things going in the morning.
Duke Cannon Thick High Viscosity Body Wash comes in four distinctly masculine scents.
There's the scent of accomplishment.
The scent of naval supremacy.
We all know that scent when we smell it.
Old glory and productivity.
Nothing like the smell of productivity.
Especially with all these shutdowns happening, there's not a lot of productivity.
If you can't be productive, you at least want to smell productive.
Thick is made with plant-based thickeners for superior lather, so you're not going to need that, whatever that puffy thing is in the shower, the loofah anymore.
You're not going to need that.
Visit dukecannon.com and use the promo code WALSH for 15% off your entire order.
Free shipping with orders over $35.
A range of Duke Cannon men's premium products are also available at your local Target.
All right, finally, there's an article in FiveThirtyEight, making the rounds today.
It attempts to explain and justify why the world shut down for coronavirus, but, and this is a question, again, speaking of common sense things, a lot of common sense people have been asking, we shut down for coronavirus, we didn't shut down for Ebola, SARS, swine flu, there's been a lot of, there have been many different outbreaks that have happened in modern times, recently.
And we didn't shut down for those.
Now, this article in FiveThirtyEight, written by Kaylee Rogers, tries to explain that, and basically to summarize her argument, she says that the other diseases were either not as contagious, like Ebola, which is extremely deadly but harder to contract, or not as deadly, like the swine flu.
And that's why she argues the shutdowns make sense for coronavirus, but they wouldn't have made sense for these other things.
But I want to go to the, because there's a problem with the logic here, I think.
I want to go to the section on the swine flu in this article, and here's what she writes.
In the spring of 2009, a new version of the H1N1 influenza virus, the virus that caused the 1918 Spanish flu pandemic, emerged and began to spread rapidly.
The swine flu has killed anywhere from 151,000 people to 575,000 people worldwide since 2009, according to the CDC, and may have infected over a billion people.
The swine flu spreads easily person-to-person, just like COVID-19, and possibly even from people who were pre-symptomatic.
It goes on and says, so why didn't the swine flu overwhelm our healthcare systems?
The main difference is that it ended up being a much milder and less deadly infection.
There are a range of estimates, estimated case fatality rates for swine flu, but even the highest, less than 0.1%, is much lower than the current estimates for COVID-19.
And then it quotes Fauci, who says that the fatality rate was quite low, and that's why it didn't get the same kind of response.
All right.
But up to half a million people dying from a virus is still a lot, isn't it?
You're talking about half a million people.
And here's the problem.
Most of the rhetoric that's used to justify the shutdowns centers around the value of human life and how we have to make sacrifices to save people.
And, you know, we can't sacrifice the elderly and people with pre-existing conditions and so on.
People are more important than money and all this kind of stuff.
Which, of course, I agree with all of that.
You can agree with all that, that life is inherently valuable, and people are more important than money, and we shouldn't be sacrificed.
You can agree with that and still think that the shutdowns are the wrong move.
But that's the argument, for the most part.
We've all heard this stuff a million times.
And not just on Facebook and Twitter comments, but from the actual government officials who are instituting these policies.
They're the ones who are offering this as a reason.
That we gotta save human life, human life is valuable, so on and so on and so forth.
All of that, all of it, would clearly apply to the 500,000 people who died from the swine flu.
So you can say all you want that fewer people will die from this, or fewer people will die from the swine flu than will die from the coronavirus, and you may be right about that, but that has nothing really to do with the justification that we're being given for these shutdowns.
We are told, point blank, it's about preserving human life.
And if that's what it's about, then you have to explain why, you know, yes, 500,000 people may be fewer people than will ultimately die from coronavirus or could have died or whatever.
I don't know if that's true or not, but I'll grant it for the sake of argument.
Yet, that's still 500,000 people.
And so if we're doing shutdowns to save lives, why not those people?
And if you're saying that 500,000 people is not enough, if that's not enough of a death toll to justify a shutdown, where is your line?
And you have to be able to explain that.
Now, let's go to your daily cancellation.
But before we do that, I wanna give you a word from our good friends over at The Daily Wire.
The Daily Wire, I wanna tell you about this deal, and if you haven't heard about this deal yet, you need to hear about it.
When you become a Daily Wire Insider Plus or All Access member, right now, this isn't how it usually, usually you become a member, you get the Leftist Tears Tumblr, right?
You get one Tumblr.
Well, if you become a member right now, you get not one, but two of our highly coveted Leftist Tears Tumblrs.
Look, I got one Tumblr and it changed my life completely, forever.
I was never the same again.
And this is what you hear from everybody who gets this Tumblr.
They all talk about the way that it changed their life and made their life worth living in a way that it wasn't before.
I know I wake up every morning, especially in these times, and sometimes I'm very depressed and I think, what's the point of going on?
And I look at my Leftist Tears Tumblr and I realize that's why I'm going on, for that Tumblr.
Okay, this is not an exaggeration.
I've heard this from many people.
If one Tumblr can give your life meaning in this way, imagine what two Tumblrs can do.
That's all I'm saying.
So, become a Daily Wire Insider Plus or All Access member, and you get 10% off with coupon code WALSH, plus you get the two Tumblrs as well.
So you want to make sure you go ahead and do that.
All right.
Today we're going to cancel all of the media outlets, all of them, who have been publishing headlines like this from Al Jazeera.
Headline is, Dozens Buried in New York Mass Grave as Coronavirus Deaths Surge.
So dozens buried in a mass grave in New York.
Then it continues, New York is burying some of its dead in a mass grave as its daily coronavirus death toll reaches grim new records.
And every major outlet that I've seen has reported on these mass graves.
And they do it with the kind of sensational rhetoric and tone that you might expect, and that on the surface seems justified.
I mean, they're using mass graves now.
That's how bad it's gotten.
The problem, though, is that these mass graves are not new.
New York has been burying people in this mass grave since the 19th century.
In fact, they think over a million bodies have been buried there over the last century plus.
And not all from the coronavirus, of course.
Now, it's true that they're putting more people than usual in these mass graves.
We don't know how many of them are from the coronavirus epidemic, but probably a certain portion of them are.
You know, it stands to reason.
But that means the real headline should read like this.
More people than usual being buried in New York's century-old mass grave site.
Some of them might have died from the coronavirus.
That's what the real headline is.
It would be an accurate headline.
But it doesn't have the same kind of sensationalist flair to it, so instead they just report that people are being buried in mass graves.
And I think the reason I want to point to this is First of all, just to clarify, if you've seen these headlines, I know a lot of people, I've seen these stories being passed around online, and it's very startling, of course, but just to give you the perspective on it.
Also, I think it's a good lesson in how the media manipulates, and it shows why I don't really like the term fake news.
You know, I don't use it that often, because the term fake news, I think, misses the point.
Is it fake news that people are being buried in mass graves in New York?
No, not at all.
It's not fake news.
People are being buried in mass graves.
Is it fake news that some of the dead are probably coronavirus fatalities?
No, probably not.
So, the fake news, quote-unquote, comes from the emphasis and the lack of context and the sensationalist framing on it.
And it comes in the facts they decide not to report or not to emphasize or not to put in the headline versus the facts that they do put in the headline.
That's where it comes from.
And it still gives the media this plausible deniability.
It can always deny the fake news charge on the basis that what it's reporting is technically true.
Yet it is misleading the public, and it's intentionally misleading, and they know that's what they're doing.
But they're not misleading the public by literally making up fake stories out of whole cloth.
The way people talk about fake news from the media, it's like people think the media just invents stories.
Like you've got a reporter sitting in his house, making up a story, as if he's writing a fiction story.
And that might happen sometimes, but vast majority of the time, that's not what they're doing.
And it's important for us to realize this so that we can detect the quote-unquote fake news when we see it.
Usually what they're reporting is probably basically true, but what we have to look at is what are they emphasizing, how are they framing it, what details are they leaving out, and what stories are they ignoring?
Because I think that's where the bias comes in.
All right, finally.
Something a little different today.
Usually this is where I would read some emails from listeners.
But today, instead of reading an email, I want to talk about an email that I received.
And I'm not going to read it because it has a lot of personal information that I don't feel comfortable reading.
But I do have permission at least to talk about the email.
And that's good because it's honestly the most incredible email I've ever gotten from a reader.
And that's not an exaggeration.
So for context, we have to go back five years.
Five years ago, I wrote an article.
I was writing for The Blaze at the time.
And the article that I wrote was addressed to and directed to a woman who had posted a goodbye letter to the child that she was going to abort the following day.
And from what I remember, she posted it on Reddit, I think.
And I still remember seeing this, and it was very disturbing.
This woman wrote this letter to her child she was going to kill, calling the child a little one, and saying how much she loves the child, and explaining why she has to go through with the abortion.
And I wrote my article to her, pleading with her not to destroy her child.
Because I figured that by posting this online, as she had done, she must have been at least partially, at some level, hoping that someone would talk her out of it.
Because that's the only reason why you would post something like that.
If you're very confident in what you're going to do, you're not going to write this bizarre open letter to your child, who of course is never going to read it, and post it online.
So, I figured she was looking for someone to talk her out of it, and so I tried to do that.
I have no idea if I succeeded.
I never heard from the woman.
Chances are she probably never even saw what I wrote.
And I knew that when I wrote it.
Not many people did see what I wrote.
The post sort of faded into oblivion after getting just a few clicks, which was fine, of course, because I didn't write it for clicks.
And I did write it specifically to one person who I knew would probably not see it.
And so, you know, but it was worth a shot.
Anyway, fast forward five years.
Two nights ago, I got an email.
Actually, it was a message on Twitter, a direct message.
From a woman, a different woman, who had quite a powerful story to tell, I thought.
And I can only sum it up.
But she told me that she read my article when I posted it five years ago.
And she had been wanting to write to me for these past five years to tell me about this, and finally she decided to.
She read the article after she had just gone to Planned Parenthood and taken an abortion pill.
So she had made the decision to abort her child and had begun the process Of going through with it.
And I think with the abortion pill, it's usually multiple doses you have to take.
So she had taken one dose at least.
After making that decision, she was at home that night and she was on the internet and she said that she was kind of scrolling through the internet looking for something.
She didn't know exactly what she was looking for, but she was just scrolling and was distraught.
She saw my article.
She read it.
She was feeling profound regret and sadness and guilt and a million emotions that I can't even fathom, yet she read the whole thing multiple times, she said, and she began to really mourn the loss of her child.
I mean, deeply mourn, again, in a way that just going through something emotionally that I personally cannot even fathom.
And then she saw an ad pop up for abortion pill reversal.
Long story short, her daughter turns five this year.
My point in telling you this, first of all, is that it's just an incredible story, I think.
And also, I want to acknowledge the courage of this woman.
I mean, most people, myself included, you know, we can't bear to read things or listen to perspectives that we simply disagree with, right?
If we have a differing opinion, we often don't have the fortitude to hear someone out who disagrees with us.
We don't even have the courage to do that.
So imagine the kind of courage it must require if you can put yourself in this woman's shoes after she'd already made the choice to get the abortion and she had gone through with it and she thought that it was a done deal, it was irreversible.
And yet to listen to the other perspective and to be willing to confront her own decisions and think critically about them and to be honest with herself That's the other thing we're all very good at doing, is lying to ourselves, especially to justify the things we've already done.
But she didn't do that.
And I think that just requires courage, unlike what most people demonstrate in their lives.
Which, by the way, reversing an abortion pill, that's my other point in bringing this up, reversing an abortion pill is possible.
It's by no means a surefire bet, and it's a somewhat involved process.
Mostly it means taking, as far as I am aware, it means taking progesterone, multiple doses.
She told me that she had to go on bed rest for several days, just hoping, hoping that would work, and it did.
But you have to really be committed to reversing it and to saving your baby, which she was.
So, and she now has three kids.
She's married.
She has since married the father of her children and they have a happy family.
She sent me a family picture.
Beautiful kids, beautiful family, happy ending.
I don't think for a minute that I played a central role in all this.
I think it was her love for her child.
And her courage and her listening to God's calling on her heart.
God, I think, moved her to go online, search for something.
She didn't know what.
She found the article.
And then, most importantly, she saw the ad.
And so this is really a story about her and God and her child.
So, something positive to end the show with for a change.
I know that was very meaningful to me.
And, you know, it is also nice, I guess, on a more, on a personal note, it's nice that, you know, I've been doing this for a long time, putting a lot of content out there and almost all of it is forgotten 10 seconds later, including by myself.
So to know that at least one thing made a difference for one family is special to me.
So there we go.
There's my, there's my happy, sappy ending.
I won't make a habit of it.
I promise.
So we'll leave it there.
Have a great day, everybody.
Godspeed.
If you enjoyed this episode, don't forget to subscribe, and if you want to help spread the word, please give us a five-star review.
Tell your friends to subscribe as well.
We're available on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, wherever you listen to podcasts.
We're there.
Also, be sure to check out the other Daily Wire podcasts, including The Ben Shapiro Show, Michael Knoll Show, and The Andrew Klavan Show.
Thanks for listening.
The Matt Wall Show is produced by Sean Hampton, executive producer Jeremy Boring.
Our supervising producers are Mathis Glover and Robert Sterling.
Our technical producer is Austin Stevens, edited by Danny D'Amico, and our audio is mixed by Robin Fenderson.
The Matt Wall Show is a Daily Wire production, copyright Daily Wire 2020.
A new study shows Americans are worried, but they're not worried primarily about the coronavirus.
They're worried about something that poses a far more imminent risk to their lives and livelihoods.
As the backlash against our national lockdowns begins to brew, the response from mayors and governors separates the politician wheat from the politician chaff.
Then, Joe Biden gets a major endorsement now that there's no other choice, and the New York Times goes into full damage control mode to cover for grab-happy Joe Biden.
