Saturday Smackdown: Another Biden official tries to censor free speech

censor free speech
© Zimmytws |
Martin Mawyer takes top news stories weekly and gives them a painful Saturday smackdown. So here are the Smackdown lashings for the week of 12.31.22.
  • Another Biden official tries to censor free speech
  • Minnesota professor fired for showing depiction of Mohammad
  • Arrested for Praying in Your Head … How can this be?
  • Warning: Your burger is causing climate disaster
  • Judge tells parents their lawsuit is not shocking enough
  • School superintendent investigated for removing LGBT books

Another Biden official tries to censor free speech

“Gender-affirming care” just sounds like a warm, gentle hug from your grandma, doesn’t it?

But hold on to your testosterone and estrogen – it’s nothing but a euphemism for genital mutilation, surgical and chemical castration, and toxic puberty blockers for children.

Rachel Levine, the assistant secretary for Biden’s Department of Health and Human Services, is calling on big tech to censor internet “misinformation” about “gender-affirming care” for kids.

Levine calls himself transgender, but let’s be honest, he looks like a man wearing a fright wig – a little like Norman Bates in Psycho when Norman was channeling his mother.

But this is worse than a horror film. Levine’s comments are pure evil, especially his comment that transgendering our children is a thing of “positive value.” He described it as an issue of “health equity of sexual and gender minorities.”

Levine is even crazier than he looks.

Censoring free speech is truly a form of medical Nazism. And as if that wasn’t enough, on most social media platforms you can’t even criticize Mr. Levine or his deranged desire to censor his opposition.

As one commentator observed: If someone like Levine calls opposition to genital mutilation of children “misinformation” – we can all assume it’s simply “information.”

Minnesota professor fired for showing depiction of Mohammad

censor free speech

Some Muslims consider it blasphemous to show artistic depictions of their prophet, Mohammad.

Now a Minnesota professor has been fired for doing just that – displaying historic renderings of Mohammad during a class at Hamline University about, wait for it … Islamic art.

Members of the university’s Muslim Student Association were so outraged, distraught and unnerved that they complained to administrators. Did the administrators try remind the rattled students that America was built on a diversity of opinions, ideas and expression?

No, instead, they promptly fired the professor.

According to the university administration, the professor committed a “hate crime” and an “act of intolerance,” so he had to be fired, of course.

Aram Wedatalla, president of the Muslim Student Association, told administrators about the incident the day after it happened.

“This can’t be real!” emoted Aram. “As a Muslim and a black person, I don’t feel like I belong, and I don’t think I’ll ever belong in a community where they don’t value me as a member, and they don’t show the same respect that I show them.”

Ok Aram, simmer down and let’s unpack this. You feel like you don’t belong anywhere anymore because your eyes had to witness an artistic depiction of Mohammad? While you were in a class studying Islamic art?

Perhaps you’re being a tad too sensitive, Aram. After all, it’s only an artist’s depiction. Christians have been looking at depictions of Jesus, their Lord and Savior, for centuries and haven’t had their retinas burned out, their faces melted, or even felt expelled from their “communities.”

And frankly, some of the historic depictions of Jesus have been bizarre, especially the ones in film that show Jesus – a Jew, mind you – as a blue-eyed, long-haired effeminate hippie. We just take it in stride, Aram, and you should, too.

But I digress. We understand that we live in a time when everyone is offended by something and wants to censor free speech, especially snowflake college students, but this is pure nonsense.

We support the professor and hope he fights his unjust termination at the hands of woke, spineless administrators.

Arrested for Praying in Your Head … How can this be?

censor free speech

Isabel Vaught-Spruce

Imagine being approached by the police and asked, “Are you praying?”

You answer, “I might be praying in my head, but not out loud.”

Then, because you admitted to engaging in this heinous thought crime, you’re hauled into jail, interrogated, then charged.


Not in the UK, where a Christian woman, Isabel Vaught-Spruce, was recently arrested for “praying in her head” on the opposite side of the street from an abortion clinic. After her arrest, she was charged with four counts of violating the UK’s abortion clinic “buffer zone” laws that make it illegal to pray outside a clinic.

One nasty Brit commented on social media: “It’s so obvious she’s martyring herself in the glare of the public as a way of publicizing her beliefs. She knowingly went into that area to get arrested.”

So … even if you’re standing on the street, silently praying, it’s an act of willful martyrdom?

This is so bonkers it’s hard to process. Still, with the United States in the grip of its worst assault to censor free speech and expression, it’s only logical for us to pay attention to what’s happening in western Europe – because it may be coming across the pond soon.

“Toxic ideology” is another thought crime punishable with prison time in the UK.

For instance, the law makes it a crime to “condone, deny or grossly trivialize genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity and crimes against peace.”

Crimes against peace?

One British citizen was arrested for wearing an anti-police T-shirt (that might get him a medal here in the U.S.). Another was arrested for calling the Irish boyfriend of his ex-girlfriend a “leprechaun.” Yet another was arrested for singing “Kung Fu Fighting.” A teenager was arrested for protesting outside a Scientology center with a sign calling the religion a “cult.”

Is it inevitable that American citizens will soon be arrested for praying in their heads? No, but only if we speak out against this slippery slope. And, of course, as long as we keep praying … while we still can.

Warning: Your burger is causing climate disaster

© Pavel Sytsko |

Coming to a McDonald’s near you: Red labels warning you your food is killing the planet.

Yep, the climate wackos are at it again, and they’re going after your burger this time.

A fringe group of environmentalists is currently researching an idea to label fast food with warnings about the environmental impact of your fries and burgers.

How is your fast food harming the planet, you ask? Well, it’s not entirely clear, although apparently one of the big culprits is beef, considered the least climate-friendly food there is due mainly to the methane gas cows give off when they’re, uh, engaged in flatulence.

Shockingly, the research finds that slapping a red label on beef actually convinced more people to avoid those foods, even if they were no less healthy.

Apparently, environmental guilt is a powerful force, even if based on absurdly false “climate science” claims. But the biggest problem with this inane suggestion to label our food is that it interferes with our freedom to consume whatever food we want free of guilt.

Ok, that’s not exactly a constitutional right, but perhaps – given the specter of angry red labels appearing on our food – it should be.

Judge tells parents their lawsuit is not shocking enough

Stephen Foote (r) with Brian Camenker of MassResistance.

This story is shocking enough to me.  But apparently not to a federal judge in Massachusetts.

Judge Mark Mastroianni ruled against parents Stephen Foote and Marissa Silvestri who sued school officials for failing to inform them of their children’s desire to transgender.

The judge said the parents’ situation fails the “shocks-the-conscience” legal standard for due-process claims. (Is that even a legal thing? Shock-the-conscience? New to me)

One of the students, a girl, who told school officials she decided she was “gender-queer,” wanted to be known by a new name and pronouns, and didn’t want her parents to know. The parents only found out when one teacher broke school rules and contacted the girl’s father – but the principal fired the tattletale teacher as punishment.

The judge also ruled that the parents did not prove their children needed “mental health treatment” instead of transgender surgery and/or drugs. We can almost hear the judge considering this weighty question: “Hmm … mental health treatment or genital mutilation. Yep, let’s go with the mutilation.”

This is another one of those stories that defies credulity. However, on a slightly brighter note, the judge did give the school officials a stern talking to about hiding information from the parents.

The parents are considering an appeal, and we hope they do.

The foul judge who let these perverse school officials off the hook needs to be overruled, and also castrated from the bench.

Imagine the long-term damage that could have been inflicted on the minds and bodies of these students if the parents hadn’t found out about the school’s cover-up, and gotten their children the psychological help they clearly need.

School superintendent investigated for removing LGBT books

Granbury Independent School District Texas Superintendent Jeremy Glenn

It all began when Texas school Superintendent Jeremy Glenn told his staff: “I acknowledge that there are men that think they’re women and there are women that think they’re men. I don’t have any issues with what people want to believe, but there’s no place for it in our libraries.”

Glenn then told the school librarians to remove LGBT-themed material from the school libraries.

Sounds perfectly reasonable to us. After all, children shouldn’t be reading sexually explicit material in school, nor should they be indoctrinated into the gay/transgender lifestyle.

But Glenn’s comments were recorded by a staff member and he was ratted out to the American Civil Liberties Union (yes, them!). Now Glenn is under investigation for violating Title IX, which bans discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender.

The ACLU’s complaint accused Glenn of creating a “pervasively hostile” environment by removing sexually explicit books. Glenn’s action, said the ACLU, is “part of the wave” of anti-LGBT rhetoric, “resulting in violence across the nation.”

(Remember when the ACLU used to oppose the censoring of free speech?)

But the bigger questions are, what violence? What hostile environment? Who’s being discriminated against? Is not being proactive for the LGBT cause now an act of illegal discrimination? You bet it’s moving in that direction!

This investigation may be a bell-weather case because it could force our taxpayer-funded schools to populate school libraries with perverse gay and transgender sexual propaganda aimed at our children.

But, on a more hopeful note, it could also go the other way – and give schools the right NOT to indoctrinate children into the gay and transgender agenda and their parents the right to raise them free of this evil ideology.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here