Below is my column in The Hill on how Democrats in some blue states are moving from censoring speech to compelling speech in renewed attacks on free speech. They are facing resistance in the courts despite determined efforts to force others to mouth approved viewpoints.
Here is the column:
More than five years ago, I wrote in these pages of a growing trend on the left toward compelled speech — the forcing of citizens to repeat approved views and values. It is an all-too-familiar pattern. Once a faction assumes power, it will often first seek to censor opposing views and then compel the endorsement of approved views.
This week, some of those efforts faced setbacks and challenges in blue states like Washington and Illinois.
In Washington state, many have developed what seems a certain appetite for compelled speech. For example, Democrats recently pushed through legislation that would have compelled priests and other clerics to rat out congregants who confessed to certain criminal acts. Despite objections from many of us that the law was flagrantly unconstitutional, the Democratic-controlled legislature and Democratic governor pushed it through.
The Catholic Church responded to the enactment by telling priests that any compliance would lead to their excommunication.
U.S. District Court Judge Iain D. Johnston enjoined the law, and the Trump Administration sued the state over its effort to turn priests into sacramental snitches. Only after losing in court did the state drop its efforts.
In the meantime, the University of Washington has been fighting to punish professors who refuse to conform to its own orthodox values. In 2022, Professor Stuart Reges triggered a firestorm when he refused to attach a prewritten “Indigenous land acknowledgement” statement to his course syllabi. Such statements are often accompanied by inclusive and tolerant language of fostering different viewpoints in an academic community. However, when Reges decided to write his own land acknowledgment, university administrators dropped any pretense of tolerance.
Reges was not willing to copy and paste onto his syllabus a statement in favor of the indigenous land claim of “the Coast Salish peoples of this land, the land which touches the shared waters of all tribes and bands within the Suquamish, Tulalip, and Muckleshoot nations.” Instead, he wrote, “I acknowledge that by the labor theory of property, the Coast Salish people can claim historical ownership of almost none of the land currently occupied by the University of Washington.”
His reference to the labor theory is a nod to John Locke, who believed in natural rights, including the right to property created through one’s labor.
In my forthcoming book, “Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution,” I explore the foundations of the American Republic, including the influence of Locke. The Framers would have been appalled by efforts to compel speech as an example of “democratic despotism.” The Framers saw the greatest danger to our system as coming not from a tyrant but the tyranny of the majority.
Reges came face-to-face with the rage of a majority faction defied. He was told that although the university land acknowledgment was optional, his own acknowledgment was not allowed because it contributed to “a toxic environment.”
This week, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled in Reges’s favor and allowed his lawsuit to move forward. Judge Daniel Bress wrote that “student discomfort with a professor’s views can prompt discussion and disapproval. But this discomfort is not grounds for the university retaliating against the professor.”
Reges’s lawsuit, brought with the help of the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, is a major victory for free speech.
However, the desire to both silence and compel speech continues to grow in tandem.
In Illinois, Democrats have taken up the cudgel of compelled speech on the issue of abortion. Again, over objection that the law was unconstitutional, Democrats and Gov. JB Pritzker passed a law that said that all healthcare providers, including pro-life and religious pregnancy help centers, must extoll to their patients the “benefits” of abortion, even if they have faith-based objections to abortion.
The Catholic Conference of Illinois and other religious organizations are represented by the Becket Fund, a leading defender of religious liberty in the courts.
A district court recently struck down the law, but Illinois refuses to give up. It is appealing the case in the hope of forcing pro-life health professionals to espouse the benefits of abortions.
Cardinal Blase Cupich, Chicago’s archbishop, warned this week that “The Church’s pro-life mission is under attack in Illinois” and called on every Catholic to oppose “this inhumane mandate.”
Note that neither the constitutional guarantee of free speech nor that of free exercise deterred these efforts to compel speech. It is the very face of democratic despotism as the majority brushes aside disfavored views and values as “toxic” or “harmful.” It shows how, 250 years after our founding, the seeds for majoritarian tyranny remain in this (like in any) democratic system.
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. He is the author of the forthcoming “Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution” on the 250th anniversary of the American Revolution.
Yeah, Turley, it’s DEMOCRATS who are the REAL threat to free speech–right? It’s DEMOCRATS who threaten the FCC licenses of media outlets that carry programs that mock Trump or ask questions he doesn’t like, such as ABC (Jimmy Kimmel, who got kicked off the air temporarily), NBC (Seth Meyers, Peter Alexander), CNN (Kaitlan Collins), MSNOW (all hosts), Stephen Colbert, etc,. It’s the DEMOCRATS who kicked media out of the Pentagon that wouldn’t sign a pledge to only publish information cleared first by Whiskey Pete and his staff–even Fox wouldn’t buy into this one, so all the Pentagon has is MAGA media, using the name “news” in their title, but which are really just pro-MAGA mouthpieces set up by billionaires to put over Trump and the Project 2025 Agenda. And, it’s DEMOCRATS who have sued various print and visual media companies–right? Sorry, the MAGA message isn’t working. Trump is the biggest threat to free speech in decades–maybe ever.
Sued for what.? Lying or fake news.
That’s why they “paid” up.
You left that out.
“In 2022, Professor Stuart Reges triggered a firestorm when he refused to attach a prewritten ‘Indigenous land acknowledgement’ statement to his course syllabi.”
– Professor Turley
_____________________
Indians are indigenous to Asia.
Indians are not indigenous to what is now known as North America.
Indians originated in Asia and are indigenous only to Asia.
Indians may only make their “indigenous” claim in Asia.
End of discussion.
_____________________
Indigenous
1a: produced, growing, living, or occurring natively or naturally in a particular region or environment
_________
AI Overview
Scientific and genetic data in 2025 confirm that the founding populations of the Americas originated in Asia.
All were savages.
The bears roamed the land just like the Indians.
Why not honor the ursuses’ not dissimilar implied claim and give it all to the bears?
“must extoll to their patients the “benefits” of abortion”
That quoted word, benefits, where did Jonathan Turley quote it from? Use of unattributed quotes is sloppy work, not unexpected in works by millionaires on behalf of billionaires to convert the middle and lower class to minions.
Obviously, it is not a quote but the use of quotation marks to show that he is using the term ironically. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scare_quotes He seems to doubt that abortion is beneficial to anyone.
TO ALL FROM LIN.
‘Twas the night before Congress and all through the House,
not a creature was stirring, not even Anonymous.
The House Bills were pending, all hanging with care,
in hopes that St. Hakeem would get them outta there.
The ‘children’ on this blog were nestled all snug in their beds,
While visions of “likes” and upvotes danced in their heads;
And Melania in her gown and Trump still on his app,
Had just settled down for a long winter’s nap,
When out on the lawn there arose such a clatter,
Trump sprang from the bed to see what was the matter.
Away to the window he flew like a flash,
Tore open the shutters and threw up the sash.
The moon on the breast of the new-fallen snow
Gave the lustre of mid-day to objects below,
When, what to his wondering eyes should appear,
But a miniature sleigh, and eight tiny mutineers,
With a little old driver, so lively a scheme!
Trump knew in a moment it must be Hakeem.
More rapid than eagles his coursers they came,
And he whistled, and shouted, and called them by name;
“Now, GOLDMAN and SWALWELL and LOFGREN and CROCKETT!
“Now, WASSERMAN-SCHULTZ and OMAR and PLASKETT!
To the top of the porch! to the top of the wall!
Now dash away! dash away! dash away all!”
But Trump was too smart, a right jolly old elf,
And he laughed when he saw them, in spite of himself;
A wink of his eye and a twist of his head,
Soon gave them to know they had plenty to dread;
He spoke not a word, but went straight to his work,
And filled up their stockings with E.O.s and smirk.
And laying his finger aside of his nose,
And giving a nod, —all their Bills he froze.
He sprang to his own Sleigh, to his team gave a whistle,
And away they all flew like the down of a thistle.
Bondi and Blanche and Wiles and Bessent,
and Patel and Leavitt, who knows where they went!
But I heard Trump exclaim, ere he drove out of sight,
MERRY CHRISTMAS TO ALL, AND TO ALL A GOOD-NIGHT!
(thanks for tolerating my little fun. and especially Professor Turley and his team! Faster than a speeding insult! More powerful than a loco motive! Able to leap tall tales in a single bound! Is it Santa??? NO, it’s Turley, fending off the nonsense posts like snowflakes off a duck’s back! Holiday wishes to all!
Lin,
Very nice!
“It shows how, 250 years after our founding, the seeds for majoritarian tyranny remain in this (like in any) democratic system.”
That those power-hungry seeds are an ineradicable part of human nature informed the Founders of the need for a suppressing mechanism of equal power, in other words, a Constitution.
What I find interesting about the University of Washington land acknowledgement is what it doesn’t say but implies. It doesn’t actually say that the land was stolen but it implies it. The facts are a bit more interesting. In 1855 the Washington Territory governor, Isaac Stevens, signed a treaty (the 1855 Treaty of Point Elliot) with some 22 tribes represented by 81 Indian signatures for the sale of a large swath of land. Governor Stevens was the beneficiary of a long learning process regarding the negotiation of treaties with Indian tribes. To forestall, or at least mitigate, conflicts between the Indians and settlers he proactively sought to resolve land ownership of the Washington territories ahead of the anticipated mass migration of settlers for not only the benefit of the settlers but of the Indians. He wisely circumvented any complications due to multiple overlapping tribal claims of the same territory or considerations of the labor theory of property by assembling this large contingent for a joint treaty to sell the rights of the land to the US government. There are a number of articles that deal with compensation – at least one of which we in the Pacific Northwest are still constrained by – Indian fishing rights. Of some note is the 11th article, 10 years prior to the adoption of the 13th amendment, which frees the slaves of the local Indian tribes and abolishes the practice of slavery by the tribes. One can only imagine the difficulty it was to convey and translate Western legalese into the native languages which was well adapted to stone age consideration but had not benefited from a long history of legal evolution such as the United States.
In my opinion, the history of this treaty is far more edifying than this prayer for forgiveness to a stone age peoples of long ago. Aspiring to be a learning institution, one would think that the University of Washington might take the time to educate its students and faculty or minimally to ask, in their prayer to the stone age peoples of long ago, for wisdom. On the other hand, is it too much to ask the university to value and cherish their American heritage – particularly that of free speech?
Another “sign or die” treaty.
All were savages.
The bears roamed the land just like the Indians.
Why not honor the ursuses’ not dissimilar implied claim and give it all to the bears?
A N – Thanks for the history and measured thoughts. It seems a waste of time to analyze this country’s harm to the indigenous peoples under our property concepts. The Indians did not own anything by deed. They did not divide the land or waters into parts. No individual had higher claim that another. They did not have a money economy necessary to sell pieces of land or water. As you say, they were a stone-age people who traveled through, and occupied for a time, an undefined area. It was not their “property” that was lost but their way of living. That was inevitable when European colonization began, and it was inevitable that their way of life would be superseded by colonies from somewhere. The loss of their way of life was not a “crime” but a tragedy. In truth, their descendants have been benefited by that loss.
Dear Prof Turley,
Briefly, the Framers, including Locke, saw the greatest danger coming from a tyrant (i.e. King George) who controlled the levers of state/government power. .. not from a “tyranny of the majority”.
That’s why the Framers created the 1st amendment; ‘”Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
Nothing in there about the ‘tyranny of the majority’.
*You must be thinking about the good Dr. Stockmann. An idealistic, courageous doctor who discovers contamination in the town’s water. Despite frothing opposition, he refuses to compromise truth. .. his steadfast honesty isolates him, branding him an “enemy of the people.”
DG
If King George and his Torries controlled the colonies, they were the tyrannical majority. The people living under their rule, although a majority were complacent sheep. Only 3% stood in the silent majorities best interests of founding a new Nation. If you don’t understand that, their job has been complete.
jello.
Nonsense. Clearly, old King George wasn’t very popular here in the colonies. .. if he was anywhere.
If you do’t understand that .. . perhaps you would make a fine mediator for His Royal Majesty, King Trump?
*The trouble with Scotland . ..
Almost daily Professor Turley writes about the malfeasance, totalitarianism and outright felonies of his fellow Democrats. And yet somewhere, among his most treasured possessions, is his DNC voter registration card.
The speculation as to why he doesn’t sever his identification with and membership in that corrupt Marxist totalitarian party could fill pages.
Maybe it’s simply a matter of not wanting to be disinvited from Washington DC society’s canapes and cocktails party circuit. Or dealing with friendship turned to animosity from his fellow Washington DC Bar Association members like Merrick Garland, Judge Boasberg, James Comey, Jack Smith, etc.
Really how did vote in the Florida Primary?
Certainly the land acknowledgements are cowardly replacements for people returning their own property if they feel it was taken unlawfully. Words are cheap and, in this case, hypocritical.
Yet the Right also compels speech with all of its demands for apologies for wrong-think. This happened a lot with Kirk. To me every human life is precious, and Kirk’s life no more precious than the unconvicted people killed in boats off Venezuela, who aren’t even ACCUSED of a capital crime.
“Charlie Kirk Might As Well Have Died In a Venezuelan Fishing Boat!”
Is my motto.
“Charlie Kirk Might As Well Have Died trolling at 80 mph while surrounded by piles of his Christian fishing nets In a Venezuelan Fishing Boat!”
Oh, there’s no question we would be in the same boiling pot as Britain had Kamala won. It’s spooky how close we came to losing everything, and really – as evidenced by this piece they’d happily resume their tyranny; the left can’t be trusted with power again for a very long time, if ever.
Losing everything? A vast and barren landscape scraped clean of every evidence anyone had ever existed here? Stripped of clothing and language? No food, no water, no air?
The tyranny of Britain was taxes collected to pay for the defense of the colonies by the colonists. There was also the looming elimination of chattel slavery that was clear would soon happen to British colonies, having already eliminated slavery in the British isles.
I was enjoying the holidays until I got a Petit Jury summons.
Now I’m in a bad mood. But if I win tonight’s Powerball jackpot, I will be in a good mood….God willing.
The Trump administration just censored a 60 Minutes story that makes them look bad. So STFU about free speech Turley.
60 minutes is bunk.
Proof of this claim?
The Trump administration just censored a 60 Minutes story that makes them look bad. So STFU about free speech Turley.
The ol’ Bolshevik Barack and Bribery Biden defense: lie your Marxist ass off.
If the Trump administration had actually censored the professional Democrat propagandists/liars at 60 Minutes, you would have included gloating references to Democrat lawyers rushing to Obama and Biden judges to (rightly if this were truth instead of a lie) strike that censorship down.
Just turn off CNN and forget about the manufactured propaganda you’ve been fed.
If leftists want to extinct themselves through abortion, misandry, and sexual deviancy, who am I to interfere? This probably deserves a special category for the Darwin Awards.
Just… can you please leave the rest of us out of it.
Well said. Now to get them off Margaret Thatcher’s “other people’s money”.
😂 👍
I forgot to mention the other form of self-extinction: misoikos (hatred of one’s own group).
Misoikos takes two forms: gangs (black-on-black crime) and white guilt (white-on-white crime).
You clown.
If leftists want to extinct themselves? Clearly a recent illegal commenting here – no speakie, writie inglés.
Oh, there’s another group I forgot to mention: Jewish antisemites. This tribe of Judaism is mostly found in Hollywood and Martha’s Vineyard and suffer from an advanced case of Stockholm Syndrome. Their motto: “From the river to the sea, please, take me!”
I say if leftists want to extinct themselves, give them all the help they need!
Ding ding ding. Correct answer. Erase humans from the earth using toxic injections, murdering fetuses, castrating children. Having an abortion is a heartbreak. Ask any woman. We are forced into it for various reasons at times, but it is anathema, defying what our bodies know to do. What our hearts long for. The idea that anybody would claim that it has “benefits” i s a sacrilege.
Castrating children. Another extinction event. Thanks for reminding me. The one good thing about the Darwin Awards, there’s always parking available.
Diogenes,
Hear! Hear!! A recent study points to by 2030, 46% of Western women will be single. Another study found the birthrate of liberals at 1.6 whereas for conservatives it is 2.4. The replacement rate is 2.1. So, yes, leftists are going to go extinct.
Upstate, that’s why they’re trying to replace us at the border. They know the meek will inherit the Earth if the Devil doesn’t get his way.
Trying to change the way people speak is thought by philosophers like Wittgenstein to change the way people think.
It’s a form of mind control. It’s an affront to freedom of thought.
I don’t see any difference between forcing people under your control to:
say “pregnant person” rather than “pregnant woman”
say “Trump Kennedy Center” rather than “Kennedy Center”
say “xe” instead of “he”
say “Gulf of America” instead of “Gulf of Mexico”
Both are examples of attempting to shape the way free people think. I reject both as brimming over with hubris.
your posts brim over with stupidity yet here you are.
[Insert 1A verbiage here]
Gulf of America is equitable and inclusive.
Pregnant person is transhuman like two fathers or mothers.
These pockets of felony stupid in Washington and Illinois occur against a purpose built Constitution that protects the individual from the “madding crowd”. What troubles this writer the back story. There had to be discussion in the decision making about the survivability of the measure against constitutional scrutiny. Or was there? There is the line of reasoning of Alexandria Ocasio- Cortez that the Constitution is just not helpful. Was that the guiding principle for the decision? It is encouraging that these measures were chewed up and spit out by the Article lll people. That is the process of “they came at us in the same old way, and we sent them along in the same old way”. But the back story informs how best to fashion civic and political speech to neutralize these pockets of stupid root and branch. Not to mention the savings taxpayers in those pockets get when foolish measures and laws do not have to be litigated.
Not sure why Professor Turley is painting this as a Democratic party problem. Democrats and Republicans are trying to suppress academic freedom in the name of preferred political objectives.
How is the UW story any different from Texas A&M firing Professor McCoul after she was confronted by a student who disagreed with a discussion on gender theory? Her dismissal, which violated TAMU’s commitment to academic freedom, was in response to political pressure from Texas political leaders and the governor. This sends a chilling message to the entire academic community in Texas.
UW and TAMU took similar steps to erode academic freedom, yet Turley chooses to act like this is only a problem on the Left.
Both parties at fault, and the article should have reflected that, unless Turley’s primary motivation is only to fuel the “Age of Rage.”
Democrats and Republicans are trying to suppress academic freedom in the name of preferred political objectives.
Gonna get that Democrat excuse of attempting to craft a moral equivalency in here before dodging and disappearing.
Perhaps, you should read my comment again.
I am neither a Democrat nor a Republican. Not everyone sees things as Team Blue vs. Team Red.
My comment was not whataboutism. It was a critique of the scope of Turley’s argument. Whataboutism is a logical fallacy used to avoid addressing a difficult question or accusation. Turley’s scope – aka looking just at Dems – fails to recognize the systemic nature of the problem.
I am neither a Democrat nor a Republican. Not everyone sees things as Team Blue vs. Team Red.
No, of course you’re not and you don’t. You just accidentally fell into attempting to establish a false moral equivalency based on a false example of wrongful discharge!
That is: Republicans in political office and learning institutions are equally attacking free speech and attempting to compel speech, just as Marxists/Democrats are.
And you blew right past the fact that Professor McCoul’s teaching of her own political agenda, completely different than what was listed by the university in the course catalog that students choose their course load from, violated multiple standards of behavior that teaching staff agree to comply with.
It wasn’t the students getting course content that differed from what they signed up and paid for who were being cheated/defrauded by the professor. No, in your version the professor was being cheated of some right to create her own political course content. Another accident in forgetting to mention that!
Supposedly all of us can see the moral equivalency you’re posting about it in the news every week for YEARS now. You’re just the one with the courage to draw our attention to that.
Not a whit of difference to be seen between the right/Democrats and the Marxists/Democrats – and we should acknowledge both your credibility and correctness in pushing that proposition of moral equivalency.
You need to borrow a less leaky false flag war canoe from Princess Liawatha Fauxahontas Warren before your next attempt to deliver your message paddling up your River Of Denial.
And find a better woke cultural Marxist Professor than McCoul to use as your preferred victim of Republicans. Students are consumers who have every right to have professors provide the course content they chose and paid the university for. Professors have no right to throw out the advertise course content and substitute their own.
I learned this afternoon that key leaders in the College of Arts and Sciences approved plans to continue teaching course content that was not consistent with the course’s published description. As a result, I directed the provost to remove the dean and department head from their administrative positions, effective immediately.
Our students use the university’s published information in the course catalog to make important decisions about the courses they take in pursuit of their degrees. If we allow different course content to be taught from what is advertised, we let our students down. When it comes to our academic offerings, we must keep our word to our students and to the state of Texas.
Yet again, this is not a moral equivalency. Both actions taken were wrong. In fact, theFIRE.org spoke out against both as problematic restrictions on academic freedom.
I did not “[blow] right past the fact that Professor McCoul’s teaching . . . [was] completely different than what was listed by the university in the course catalog” because that is factually incorrect:
https://www.texastribune.org/2025/09/19/texas-a-m-welsh-firing-professor-gender-mccoul/#:~:text=According%20to%20the%20syllabus%2C%20students,one%20of%20whom%20is%20queer.
According to the syllabus, students were required to read nine books, a mix of required texts and ones they could choose from a list. That meant at minimum three books featuring LGBTQ+ themes: “Princess Princess Ever After,” a fairy tale romance between two princesses; “Jude Saves the World,” about a nonbinary middle schooler; and either “The King of the Dragonflies,” about a boy with feelings for another boy, or “Hurricane Child,” about a girl’s crush on her classmate. A fourth was possible if students selected “Mirror to Mirror,” which follows twin sisters, one of whom is queer.
How discussion of gender identity “completely different” from the course she was teaching?
I cannot respond to the rest of your message, as it is utterly incoherent.
At least in the topics he chooses to write about, Prof. Turley seems to apply a double-standard in his conception of free speech.
That said, I applaud J.D. Vance for marginalizing Tucker Carlson, Candace Owens and Nick Fuentes as fringe voices who are a disgrace to Republican values. The political party that best disciplines its fringe will win in 2026 and ’28.
pbinca says At least in the topics he chooses to write about, Prof. Turley seems to apply a double-standard in his conception of free speech.
There has never been a single time you popped up here to excoriated your fellow Democrats who are the equivalents of Carlson, Owens, and Fuentes (none of whom I give even a minute’s attention or legitimacy). You can’t even bring yourself to mention your Democrat equivalent anti-Semitics that are ELECTED Democrats – not just bloggers and podcasters like those above who can simply be ignored.
Not a single word posted by you about the Democrats’ Hajji Anti-Semitic Socialist Sisterhood in the House, the supporters of Hamas and their goal of eradicating Israel and Israelis. Not a whimper of complaint posted by you about Ilhan Omar, Rashid Tlaib, Pressley, et al.
Suffering from long established core Democrat values of double-standards and hypocrisy, pbinca?
Are your Hypocrisy Antenna broken when Democrat anti-Semitism is filling the airwaves and rioting their way across American universities and city streets? Got a valid excuse for not condemning them?
As you want to throw double-standard accusations around pbinca, don’t dump and run away: get back into your personal double standards with your repeated attempts to make the Second Amendment a dead letter.
Or if you prefer, revisit your Big Lie theory: that the 2020 election was the most transparent in history, and Trump was wrong to claim it was corrupt as hell.
Your move pbinca: stay and play – or do as usual and run away from your hypocrisy and double standards?
Are you still a Democrat?
Those who can’t tell the difference between Democrats and Independents are drinking the MAGA koolaid. Winning is all about attracting Independents. Writing off I’s as the same as D’s is a loser mentality. It’s a surefire way to feel good about your purity and lose elections.
Those who can’t tell the difference between Democrats and Independents are drinking the MAGA koolaid.
All of those individuals above pointing out by Professor Turley are supposedly Independents? Including the ones who ran for office under the commie Democrat party banner i.e. the governors of Washington and Illinois?
Gaslighting
Gaslighting is the intended psychological manipulation by a low-IQ perpetrator of those they hope to victimize through intentionally misleading that person or group. This involves the perpetrator lying, denying events, and other methods used in the hope their intended victims doubt their perceptions of reality, memories, and feel overly emotional or irrational.
The main five methods of gaslighting that may be used alone or in conjunction with others are: lying, blame shifting, countering, trivializing and withholding.
JT
Good article and it’s spot on with the tyranny of the majority on display in the blue states and liberal universities. Evidencing their relentless attacks on freedom of speech, expression and religious values. Who are these blue haired demons to decide what beliefs or views are toxic or harmful? Is anti abortion toxic to the unborn child or to the young person that follows their path only to later live in feelings of guilt, shame and remorse? These people are evil and every American should be made fully aware of their pursuit, you will own nothing and you will like it.
The force of the effort to “fundamentally change” the United States of America was always in one direction-Marxism/Communism. Fortunately in these cases of compelled beliefs by the Government (Communism), some lawful Judges saw the danger and Constitutional violations. However, we have seen through the last 10 months that not all Judges are lawful or Constitutional. I renew my call for Criminal penalties for those responsible for willful Constitutional violations by anyone in the United States…….
always in one direction? Can you cite your sources please?
WEF
Globalism/Israel
You will own nothing and you will like it.
The Federal Reserve
Defund the Police
Division and Identify politics
always in one direction? Can you cite your sources please?
Because it’s only one direction? More sources than the ones mentioned in the article? You are far more entertaining when a circus ringmaster has you perched on a stool, happily clapping your flippers and barking while balancing a beach ball on your nose.
Sealioning:
Sealioning is a form of adolescent trolling where someone persistently demands answers to insincere questions to provoke a response, often pretending to seek a civil debate while actually trying to exhaust or frustrate others with no intention of real discourse. This behavior is characterized by a facade of politeness and a refusal to acknowledge previous answers.
Often used as a tactic by whining Democrats in online forums and blogs
FYI…Yale…funded with billions of Taxpayer Dollars directly, via States, non-profit status, via federal, loan guarantees both for the student, cities, and directly.
Defund IT! End all Federally funding!
Yale has Exactly ZERO Republican representation…a statistical impossibility, based on ability
We need to go scorched Earth on Democrats….I want them Abolished!
that was yesterday’s column stupid.
I would bet that he’s not stupid
But you are.