Speaker 1: In Florida. The state government is attempting to muzzle WFLA
Speaker 1: News by threatening to criminalize the TV station WFLA Tampa
Speaker 1: one is a station being intimidated for broadcasting an AD
Speaker 1: that is pro Amendment four, which would reinstate abortion until
Speaker 1: twenty to twenty six weeks now. Of course, Governor DeSantis
Speaker 1: has been quite outspoken about the six week abortion band
Speaker 1: that is currently in place, and the letter was sent
Speaker 1: to the FWFLA station, signed by John Wilson, general counsel
Speaker 1: for the Florida Department of Health, bullying the station for
Speaker 1: airing the ad. Of course, the letter is an attempt
Speaker 1: to intimidate the press to assist in the objections of
Speaker 1: the state government by getting them to not air an
Speaker 1: ad that was produced by the group Floridians Protecting Freedom.
Speaker 1: This story is from truth Out by Chris Walker and
Speaker 1: was published October ninth, twenty twenty four. Well, that's an
Speaker 1: interesting that's a really interesting take on what the state
Speaker 1: government thinks they can do to the press. I thought
Speaker 1: we had freedom of pressed in this country, Cynthia. Do
Speaker 1: you think the problem is that the Florida laws in
Speaker 1: this respect are rather vague or do you think they're
Speaker 1: well enough, well enough to be understood completely. I thought
Speaker 1: we really came out poorly. I'm sorry.
Speaker 2: No, you're fine, you're fine, you know well. The controversy
Speaker 2: highlights the vagueness of Florida's abortion laws, which could prevent
Speaker 2: necessary medical procedures even in the life or death situations, right.
Speaker 2: And we've actually seen this across the country where people
Speaker 2: who are pregnant and may not necessarily have viable pregnancies
Speaker 2: are being denied care because a lot of the abortion
Speaker 2: laws and even what you can and cannot give as
Speaker 2: treatment to people who may have either at topic presidencies
Speaker 2: or if they're miss carrying actual life saving abortions so
Speaker 2: that they can you know, not die, and Florida happens
Speaker 2: to be one of them. So in this particular case,
Speaker 2: even though Poles actually indicate that the majority of Floridian
Speaker 2: is actually support amendment, for the amendment faces an uphill
Speaker 2: battle for approval, requiring a super majority of sixty percent
Speaker 2: in the upcoming vote. Sounds so much like the Senate filipbuster.
Speaker 1: How did they know was that that's a vote in
Speaker 1: the state congress or are they doing this as a
Speaker 1: resolution a voter referendum.
Speaker 2: That's a voter referendum.
Speaker 1: It is it is. How do they and I don't
Speaker 1: know if you have the answer to this, but how
Speaker 1: do they justify that super majority the sixty percent? Is
Speaker 1: there some law that they use for that? I'm not sure,
Speaker 1: to be honest, like I said, if you don't have
Speaker 1: the answer, I don't blame you, because I don't expect
Speaker 1: you to know all of Florida election law.
Speaker 2: For god, I know, I'd be like, to be honest
Speaker 2: with you, I'm not necessarily sure exactly what type of
Speaker 2: law that they are using for this, you know, like
Speaker 2: to me, like I said, like when I just mentioned
Speaker 2: like that the sixty that the sixty vote of filibuster,
Speaker 2: like the Senate, I almost like feel like this is
Speaker 2: like an arbitrary number that they're just they're just like,
Speaker 2: you know, throwing out here in order for this to
Speaker 2: this put to your refrimendum to become law or not.
Speaker 2: And you know, I think there's a larger issue here.
Speaker 2: And and the larger issue is that putting bands on
Speaker 2: abortions is severely unpopular somewhere.
Speaker 1: I wasn't expecting to go with the larger issue.
Speaker 2: Yeah, well, you know, I'm always going to go to
Speaker 2: the larger issue, Kelly.
Speaker 1: No, I got a larger issue to go to too,
Speaker 1: so go ahead. But yeah, it's a different one, but
Speaker 1: go ahead.
Speaker 2: Okay, Well, you know, so let's just make this whole
Speaker 2: episode about larger issues.
Speaker 1: Larger issue, Cindy.
Speaker 2: I'm waiting for your larger issue after I'm done with
Speaker 2: my Okay, I was.
Speaker 1: Just gonna warner to come up with one.
Speaker 2: You know, it's like from the top of the dome,
Speaker 2: which I know you can do, but yeah, I mean,
Speaker 2: like when we're really talking about abortion bands and and
Speaker 2: basically like putting these particular arbitrary laws and or like
Speaker 2: guideposts like on like what you can and cannot do
Speaker 2: when it comes to these things, it's so unpopular. I
Speaker 2: would say that that is one of the number one
Speaker 2: issues that's actually driving people to come out for elections
Speaker 2: in twenty twenty four. I would definitely say that. And
Speaker 2: as we as I mentioned even in like previous segments
Speaker 2: earlier this earlier this week, you know, when we kind
Speaker 2: of like you know, glossed over the topic that we
Speaker 2: have seen real time problems with real people and how
Speaker 2: abortion bands have affected them adversely, not just in Florida.
Speaker 2: It happens in Mississippi. We taught we talked about that
Speaker 2: here on non profits, happened in Texas, happens in Ohio,
Speaker 2: it happens in other different red states where we can
Speaker 2: actually point out specific issues and specific events that have
Speaker 2: happened to real people when it comes to abortion band
Speaker 2: and I don't and I don't necessarily want to, you know,
Speaker 2: go to the conspiracy the conspiracy route here. But if
Speaker 2: we're actually looking at, as Cindy would say, observing the
Speaker 2: different events that have happened in the past, when it
Speaker 2: comes to all these things, I you know, you almost
Speaker 2: think that the vagueness of it is you know, intentional,
Speaker 2: you know, like some of the things like I pointed out,
Speaker 2: like specifically amendment for it. If you if you don't
Speaker 2: mind be kind of you know, if you want to
Speaker 2: give me like some leadway here a little floor, if
Speaker 2: you don't mind, I appreciate it. Thank you. So amendment I.
Speaker 1: Can't so yeah, I mean.
Speaker 2: You can any time, you know what I'm saying. But
Speaker 2: you know, but I did want to like ask politely,
Speaker 2: uh if people did not know that I'm one of
Speaker 2: the producers non profits. But regardless of that, but amendment
Speaker 2: for in Florida actually seeks to significantly impact abortion rights
Speaker 2: within the state by establishing constitutional protections for the procedure.
Speaker 2: And so here are the actual key potential impacts of
Speaker 2: the amendment. So one is going to enshrine enshrinement of
Speaker 2: abortion rights. So if it's passed, the amendment would explicitly
Speaker 2: protect the right to obtain an abortion in Florida, allowing
Speaker 2: individuals to access the procedure up to the point of
Speaker 2: fetal viability typically that is around twenty two to twenty
Speaker 2: five weeks of pregnancy. Secondly, it's going to counter the
Speaker 2: current law so Florida is Florida's existing law currently bans
Speaker 2: most abortions after six weeks of pregnancy, one of the
Speaker 2: most restrictive in the country. Amendment four will actually create
Speaker 2: a more permissive legal framework, providing broader access to abortion services. Thirdly,
Speaker 2: it's going to legally it's going to legally give clarity
Speaker 2: for healthcare providers, which is something that we're seeing. Is
Speaker 2: so if we're going to talk about vagueness with current
Speaker 2: abortion laws and abortion bands, that is a big one, right.
Speaker 2: So this amendment aims to clarify and protect the rights
Speaker 2: of health care providers to perform abortions without the fear
Speaker 2: of legal repercussions, especially in critical medical situations. This could
Speaker 2: prevent situations where doctors are hesitant to act due two
Speaker 2: vague legal definitions regarding life threatening circumstances. Fourthly, it will
Speaker 2: impact women's health or people who have the ability to
Speaker 2: become pregnant. I don't want to just leave it up
Speaker 2: to that. With better access to abortion services, the amendment
Speaker 2: could enhance health outcomes for pregnant individuals, particularly in cases
Speaker 2: we're continuing a pregnancy poses significant health risk. Bifly, the
Speaker 2: political and social repercussions, the passage of this amendment could
Speaker 2: energize both supporters and opponents of abortion rights, potentially impacting
Speaker 2: future elections and legislative sessions. It could also lead to
Speaker 2: increase activism and funding for reproductive rights organizations. It's also
Speaker 2: could if an active Potentially the potential and legal challenges
Speaker 2: the amendment could face immediate legal challenges for anti abortion groups,
Speaker 2: which you know, that's a thing right, which could lead
Speaker 2: to prolonged court battles over its interpretation and implications. So
Speaker 2: that could that definitely would be an issue if you're
Speaker 2: talking about issues with the law itself being vague. And
Speaker 2: then lastly, there's an influence on national trends. So as
Speaker 2: we all know that this, like like I said, abortion
Speaker 2: bands is a national issue, especially when you have like
Speaker 2: about what it is, like about fourteen to fifteen states
Speaker 2: now in the United States that actually have like you know,
Speaker 2: very restrictive abortion bans. So as other state it's observed
Speaker 2: Florida's actions regarding abortion rights amendment for outcome, could influence
Speaker 2: similar movements across the country, potentially setting a precedent for
Speaker 2: other states looking to expand or because there's always another
Speaker 2: side restrict abortion accents.
Speaker 1: I I agree with everything you just said. I don't
Speaker 1: think it's relevant to what the story is about.
Speaker 2: Though.
Speaker 1: I think this story is about freedom of the press
Speaker 1: really and I think, god, what was that sydy? Go ahead?
Speaker 3: Yeah, No, I think it's about democracy at its core
Speaker 3: because it's uh, it's a push to authoritiism. It's basically,
Speaker 3: I want to decide. I want to be able to
Speaker 3: decide what you can and can say, yeah, even enduring
Speaker 3: an ad which which is crazy. But yeah. When I
Speaker 3: read the article, the first thing that that popped into
Speaker 3: my mind was the nerve on that guy.
Speaker 1: The nerve.
Speaker 3: It's almost admirable to have so much hypocrisy and and
Speaker 3: and lack of shame in just one man. I know,
Speaker 3: those two characteristics are are pretty much you know, in
Speaker 3: in the conservative moment, they're pretty much spread, but he
Speaker 3: pushes them to a level that's that's it's just incredible.
Speaker 3: But my my question is how it is not considered
Speaker 3: election tempering because he's trying to influence an election directly
Speaker 3: by preventing people to uh to have to listen to
Speaker 3: an ad that relates to a lot that he's going
Speaker 3: to be voted on.
Speaker 2: Come on, Cindy, you know that's what happens here.
Speaker 3: I mean, that's not.
Speaker 1: She has a point though. The ad is okay, it's
Speaker 1: put out by a private group, but this is the government,
Speaker 1: government office stepping it right. She's kind of a way
Speaker 1: valid point.
Speaker 3: Oh.
Speaker 2: I know, I was. I was actually doing sarcasm right now.
Speaker 1: And that's why I love you, Cynthia, because you can
Speaker 1: do it so well.
Speaker 3: I think the thing is, uh, as you said, Cynthia,
Speaker 3: in the US, politics is much much harder than it
Speaker 3: is in other countries. Like those ads that candidate A
Speaker 3: is going to air about candidate B and only candidate B,
Speaker 3: not themselves. That just doesn't exist outside the the the well,
Speaker 3: not in Europe, at least in in France, for example,
Speaker 3: political ads are very very limited and and so, and
Speaker 3: there isn't as much money spent on politics. I understand
Speaker 3: that the US is a large country in terms of superfacy,
Speaker 3: but uh, when I see the amounts of money that
Speaker 3: spent and and for an entire year because election starts
Speaker 3: very very early, you know, that's that's just amazing. But
Speaker 3: having one candidate say, get in.
Speaker 2: Our word for what's happening here, you're being quite generous
Speaker 2: to work on making think yeah, it's very ridiculous.
Speaker 3: Yeah, he's he's because the the the amendment for is
Speaker 3: proposed by the people. It's not the government that proposes
Speaker 3: a lot that it usually happens. And these popular initiatives
Speaker 3: as they are called in Europe, they're getting traction slowly
Speaker 3: in the world, and it's a good thing. But in
Speaker 3: this case, you have some people who say, okay, we
Speaker 3: want to do this, and this is the voice of
Speaker 3: the people literally, and you have a candidate that says, no,
Speaker 3: you will not voice your opinion here on on on
Speaker 3: the public TV on on the private ad that you are,
Speaker 3: that you have the right to buy an air and
Speaker 3: and that's, uh, that's pretty much what dictators do. Yeah,
Speaker 3: they decide to choose, They choose to uh what goes
Speaker 3: into the air and what doesn't. And that's exactly what's
Speaker 3: what what's happening here. That's why I think it's a
Speaker 3: democracy problem, not well not just uh, an abortion problem,
Speaker 3: not just an election problem, but democracy problem.
Speaker 2: I was gonna say, it was really quick, like as
Speaker 2: as our colleagues across the pond would say, those are
Speaker 2: some large bullocks that the governor has displaying right now.
Speaker 1: Now. I minded in journalism in college, so when I
Speaker 1: read this, it really burned me up. That was just
Speaker 1: really pissed off. And even even if this commercial was
Speaker 1: full of falsehoods, even if it was a direct lie,
Speaker 1: as long it was as it was not endangering somebody's health,
Speaker 1: it doesn't matter. They have the First Amendment backing them up.
Speaker 1: They can say whatever the hell they want to say,
Speaker 1: right So, the state of Florida has no business at
Speaker 1: all telling what Any news organization who has also has
Speaker 1: freedom of the press behind them. So we're actually breaking
Speaker 1: two constitutional freedoms by sending this letter. And that's what
Speaker 1: really bothered me about that. To me was the big
Speaker 1: picture is the state of Florida is actually the reason
Speaker 1: for it is freaking is horrible. And I agree with
Speaker 1: I don't want to be little anything you said for
Speaker 1: the first half of this segment, Cynthia, because everything you
Speaker 1: said was right on and correct. But I thought the biggest,
Speaker 1: the big picture at least of this story, was the
Speaker 1: way that the state was squashing a news organization and
Speaker 1: thinking that it was legal to do so, that this
Speaker 1: was something they could get away with constitutionally, which of
Speaker 1: course it isn't. So that that's the thing that really
Speaker 1: bothered me about this story.
Speaker 2: If I want to interject, just to kind of piggyback
Speaker 2: on both of what you did, you know, just bringing
Speaker 2: out that particular point because I gathered that as well,
Speaker 2: especially when it comes to the bullying from the DeSantis
Speaker 2: administration about what this particular station can and cannot add. Air.
Speaker 2: Remember when we talked earlier this week about a lot
Speaker 2: of people don't know the meetings to certain words like fascism,
Speaker 2: but they use it incorrectly. This is the prime example
Speaker 2: of fashion.
Speaker 1: Oh yes, totally, yes, it is Yeah, totally agreed.
Speaker 2: When the state is interjecting what press can and cannot air,
Speaker 2: what press and press can and cannot stay, that is
Speaker 2: fascism because you're controlling the narrative and you're also propagating
Speaker 2: your particular ideology on the massive That's that's really a
Speaker 2: very very prime example of what.
Speaker 1: It is and not letting any other ideology get through. Correct, right,
Speaker 1: That's that's that's the bad part of this. We're going
Speaker 1: to shut down all the bay We're going to shut
Speaker 1: down any opposing views. And that's that's so an American
Speaker 1: it is.
Speaker 2: That's that's exactly what our experiment.
Speaker 3: There's those early warning signs of fascism. There are twelve signs.
Speaker 3: First is powerful and continuing nationalism. Second is disdain for
Speaker 3: human rights. Three identification of enemies as unifying cause. Rampant sexism,
Speaker 3: controlled mass media, obsession with national security, region and government
Speaker 3: at the twine, corporate power, protected labor power, suppressed these
Speaker 3: day for intellectual and the arts, obsession with crime and punishment,
Speaker 3: and rampant chronism and corruption. That's the earliest signs of fascism.
Speaker 3: So we'll let everyone look into that and see if
Speaker 3: there's any parallel with the current situation in the US
Speaker 3: right now.
Speaker 2: I mean yeah, I mean yeah, like, I mean yeah, yeah,
Speaker 2: you know, scare.
Speaker 3: That's the room. So those ar designs have been written
Speaker 3: in early two thousands by someone who studied all fascist
Speaker 3: regime regiments between well the entire nineteen twentieth century. So
Speaker 3: it's not just one thing that someone right wrote, you know,
Speaker 3: on the piece of papor like this. It's a solid,
Speaker 3: solid study.
Speaker 2: Yeah. And I think that one of the things that
Speaker 2: I would say, like in just like in a personal observation,
Speaker 2: just like just being like a student of history, is
Speaker 2: that fascism always seems to be interjected into a society
Speaker 2: when you are actually seeing like evolving, evolving thought, when
Speaker 2: you're seeing like the emergence of people who happen to
Speaker 2: buck against like particular traditions that have been a placed
Speaker 2: in societies previously, and with the United States being I
Speaker 2: don't necessarily like to call it like a melting pot.
Speaker 2: I think I call it like a salad, you know.
Speaker 2: And when you are having different cultures and diversities of
Speaker 2: people and they're bringing their own traditions and values and
Speaker 2: things of that nature, that's adding to the greater society.
Speaker 2: It's going to definitely cause thoughts and and and practices
Speaker 2: to change. And definitely people who don't necessarily want to
Speaker 2: see that change are willing to like really hold on
Speaker 2: uh as in school day is as a why no
Speaker 2: to its bottle as much as possible, because they don't
Speaker 2: want to see that change. They want to keep the
Speaker 2: status called the way that it is. And and and
Speaker 2: I really believe that well because he's like shown it
Speaker 2: is that Rada Santis is definitely a person that has
Speaker 2: shown himself to be of this milk.
Speaker 3: Yeah, you know, excuse me, Keally, just just one point
Speaker 3: if you don't know, please the.
Speaker 2: Girls talking right now talking, Yes, we.
Speaker 3: Can go to sleep and we'll just keep going. Yeah.
Speaker 3: In in in an earlier episode this week, something that
Speaker 3: we talked about triggered a question in my mind because
Speaker 3: a lot of religions have died in the history of humanity, right,
Speaker 3: but we we don't not, as far as I know,
Speaker 3: an example of a religion that dominated an entire culture
Speaker 3: for a very very long time that didn't happen. Religion
Speaker 3: so far, they died slowly naturally and then they were
Speaker 3: replaced by a new one. But we are in a
Speaker 3: situation where there is one dominant religion in our part
Speaker 3: of the world and another one in another part of
Speaker 3: the world. There are two bigger religions, and we see
Speaker 3: that they are slowly dying slowly.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and I'm.
Speaker 3: Afraid that a way of thinking and the power structure
Speaker 3: that's behind it, that's been in power for like almost
Speaker 3: fifteen hundred years, how they will react when they see
Speaker 3: themselves dying, And I will react exactly. That's the powerallel
Speaker 3: I was trying to make it. It's the exact same
Speaker 3: thing here. You have a powerful structure of government based
Speaker 3: on men's desires basically, and that's changing slowly. We now
Speaker 3: see war as something we really really really want to avoid,
Speaker 3: as opposed to before it was just yeah, I want
Speaker 3: your territory. Okay, let's let's end the war. And that's
Speaker 3: changing the mentality. And and now this climate change al
Speaker 3: so that's coming to the picture. And so yeah, I
Speaker 3: see a huge parallel between between the two. One uh
Speaker 3: set of belief link to religion and one set of
Speaker 3: beliefs link to our structure. Yeah.
Speaker 2: I agree.
Speaker 1: You know a lot of people in our country are
Speaker 1: trying to convince us that climate change is a hoax. Yep, sure,
Speaker 1: I'm just and again.
Speaker 2: That's a nice way to put the Kelly.
Speaker 1: So I I had a really great time this week
Speaker 1: with you, get with both of you, with John while
Speaker 1: he was playing hide and seek with us. It was
Speaker 1: a great It was a great recording session. I really
Speaker 1: had a lot of fun and we'd like to hear
Speaker 1: what you thought about it. So send us an email
Speaker 1: at TV at Atheist typhoncommunity dot org and tell us
Speaker 1: what you liked about the show, what you hated about
Speaker 1: the show, and get rid of that Kelly guy, whatever,
Speaker 1: whatever you want to say.