 Well, as many of you know, the confirmation hearings for Amy Coney Barrett have started. And before we get into what I want to talk about in this particular segment, I just have to point out that someone who tested positive for COVID-19, Mike Lee, was there without a mask. And I just, this is unbelievable because you have the opportunity to do this remotely. Ted Cruz did not show up in person because he was exposed to COVID-19 by who? Mike Lee. The person who exposed another individual is there while others who were exposed to him are not there. So that in and of itself makes this that much more absurd. But listen, what Republicans are doing and trying to rush this through before the election, this in my opinion is tantamount to court packing. This is what court packing looks like, where you do everything in your power to make sure that the ideological tilt on that court goes in your party's favor. That's what they're doing. They held the seat open for almost a year in 2016. And it's why right now they're trying to rush Amy Coney Barrett's confirmation through before the election. So in the event we get another Bush v. Gore situation, Trump has the edge. Now one thing that has been irritating me to no end about this whole situation is the idea that Amy Coney Barrett's religion is untouchable. She's part of this group known as people of praise, which I think you can argue is culty. I'm not going to call it a cult explicitly, but it's culty. It's a very, very hard line evangelical Christian branch that is openly homophobic. And people who are supposed to be holding her accountable, Senate Democrats, there's this thinking that if they do this, if they question her religiosity in an attempt to gauge whether or not her religious views will influence the way that she rules when it comes to issues related to women's rights or LGBTQ rights, that they're bigoted for doing this. And that's really frustrating. The same was true with Judge Kavanaugh where there were even some Democrats who were trying to stop other Democrats from criticizing Judge Kavanaugh's affiliation with the Knights of Columbus, which was an extremist Catholic organization that was openly homophobic again. So I mean, there is this sense that if we dare to question their religion to make sure that they're going to be impartial as justices, that's a bad thing. But AOC made a phenomenal point about why we can't allow them to use their religion as a tool to be shielded from criticism. It's just not fair. She tweeted out sick and tired of Republicans who co-opt faith as an excuse to advance bigotry and barbarism. Fact is, if today Christ himself came to the floor of Congress and repeated his teachings, many would malign him as a radical and eject him from the chamber. And that is exactly correct. Now she reiterated this point back in February and there's a video of that that she shared and she explains in this video how we can't allow them to use their religion to hold society back. Yes, we want people to be able to freely exercise religion, but you don't get to use your religion and your religious freedom to take away freedom from other people. Take a look at what she has to say. I'm experiencing this hearing and I'm struggling whether I respond or launch into this question as a legislator or from the perspective of a woman of faith because I cannot, it's very difficult to sit here and listen to arguments in the long history of this country of using scripture and weaponizing and abusing scripture to justify bigotry. What supremacists have done it, those who justified slavery did it, those who fought against integration did it, and we're seeing it today. And sometimes, especially in this body, I feel as though if Christ himself walked through these doors and said what he said thousands of years ago, that we should love our neighbor and our enemy, that we should welcome the stranger, fight for the least of us, that it is easier for a rich man, it's easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to get into a kingdom of heaven, he would be maligned as a radical and rejected from these doors. And I know, and it is part of my faith, that all people are holy and all people are sacred, unconditionally, and that is what makes faith sometimes, that's what prompts us to transform because it is unconditional, it's not about that it is up to us to love parts of people, we love all people. There is nothing holy about rejecting medical care of people, no matter who they are on the grounds of what their identity is, there is nothing holy about turning someone away from a hospital, there's nothing holy about rejecting a child from a family, there's nothing holy about writing discrimination into the law and I am tired of communities of being of faith, being weaponized and being mischaracterized because the only time religious freedom is invoked is in the name of bigotry and discrimination, I'm tired of it. My faith commands me to treat Mr. Minton as holy because he is sacred, because his life is sacred, because you are not to be denied anything that I am entitled to, that we are equal in the eyes of the law and we are equal in my faith in the eyes of the world. And so I just have to get that out ahead of time because it is deeply disturbing, not just what is happening here, but what this administration is advancing is the idea that religion and faith is about exclusion, it is not up to us, it is not up to us to deny medical care, it is up to us to feed the hungry, to close the poor, to protect children and to love all people as ourselves. That is such a powerful point. The only time religious liberty is invoked is in the name of bigotry and discrimination and that's correct because guess what, when we hear stories about bakers denying service to gay couples, don't want to bake them a wedding cake, what's the excuse that we hear? Well, that's just religious liberty. Okay, the same thing was said to justify slavery, discrimination, segregation. So why do we keep allowing someone to weaponize religion? We shouldn't. But we kind of are and if we give Amy Coney Bear to pass because we don't want to offend her because she's religious, then people who are actually vulnerable and marginalized are going to suffer the consequences and AOC said there's nothing holy about rejecting medical care. There is nothing holy about turning someone away from a hospital. So understand why this is so important of a point. The people who claim to follow Jesus literally ignore most of his teachings, but if you truly were a follower of your own God, then you wouldn't allow people to go without healthcare in this country. You wouldn't demonize socialized medicine because Jesus was a socialist, right? And another thing, there's this double standard because on one hand we are always concerned about Christians and making sure they have religious liberty. But Ilhan Omar brings up a phenomenal point saying, let's be clear about this. If a Muslim woman was nominated to the Supreme Court, you would see Republicans lose their mind about her religious background. Sharia law would be trending right now, miss me with the pearl clutching and all this righteous talk about religious freedom and she's exactly right. She is exactly right. Whenever we hear the words religious liberty or religious freedom in the context of talking about civil rights and civil liberties, understand what Republicans are saying. We're talking about the freedom for Christians to remain supreme in America at all times and impose our views on everyone else to make sure that people do what we want them to. So if we think that women shouldn't have abortions, well, our religion says it's wrong. So we're going to make sure nobody can have it. If we think that gay marriage is a bad thing, because our religion says so, then we're going to make sure that nobody can have that. Guess what? We have the separation of church and state in this country. It's the First Amendment. So we are not going to be subjected to what your religion is. There are theocracies throughout the world like Saudi Arabia that kill people for being gay, that kill people for being atheists. And I'm not saying that that's what they want. But you have to understand that when you start saying that the laws in this country should be predicated on religion, then that's a problem. And that's not necessarily what they're saying with regard to Amy Coney Barrett, but what they try to do is put her on this pedestal. That way, since she's religious, she's untouchable. You can't dare to question whether or not her extremist religious beliefs would end up leading to her being biased against a case that comes up when it comes to LGBTQ rights or abortion. No, I think that that's complete horseshit. It is the responsibility of our government to protect marginalized communities from the tyranny of the majority. And most people in this country are Christians, right? The overwhelming majority are Christians. Their religious freedom is not threatened if we ask someone who's going to go on the highest court on the land whether or not their religious extremism is going to lead to them being incapable of being impartial on the Supreme Court. That's all that this is about. So whenever people try to invoke religion to defend the right, such as Amy Coney Barrett, Brett Kavanaugh, then we need to remind them that they do not have a license to impose their religion on everyone else and also point at the fact that it's a little bit convenient that they only invoke their religion as a weapon when they're trying to obtain power or they want to subject others to second class citizenship. It's unacceptable and we can't let it happen.