Attorney Davis Younts: Unconstitutional hate crime laws, vaccine mandates, & religious tyranny


This week Greg sat down with Davis Younts. Davis is a Christian, husband, homeschool dad, attorney, and former military officer providing legal guidance and expert criminal defense to federal law enforcement and other patriots, former prosecutor, JAG, and #1 rated defense counsel in the Air Force. They discussed the constitutionality of hate crime laws, vaccine mandates, and how to legally fight back against tyranny and infringement upon religious freedoms for individuals, churches, and ministries. Enjoy!


Exploring Theology, Doctrine, and all of the fascinating subjects in between, broadcasting from an undisclosed location,
Dead Men Walking starts now. Thanks for coming along, listening, joining us, commenting on social media, visiting us at dmwpodcast .com.
We just got some new merch up as well there too, so if you want to support the show, you can go check that out. You can get one of these, if you're watching on video, one of these little
Dead Men Walking mugs that we have, or the one behind me, Wynum Dynum Romans Dynum. That's a great conversation starter on a mug.
But yeah, thanks for being here. A little shameless self -promotion at the top of the show, but guys,
I hope you were doing well, got through Christmas. Well, I shouldn't say get through Christmas.
We enjoyed the birth of our Savior. We enjoyed being with family. It was awesome that we had the
Lord's Day on Christmas today as well too, and I got to see my brothers and sisters in fellowship on Christmas.
So we're heading into the new year. We're going to have a special year -end episode coming up.
It got bumped because Dr. James White wanted to jump on. So you got to bump your year -end show when the doc says, hey,
I want to come on and talk. And so that's out right now. Next week, we'll have that. But right now
I want to get into who we have here right now, because I'm very excited about this. I love this subject.
You guys know, I'm always talking about constitutional issues. Obviously on this podcast, we talk theology, doctrine, politics, culture.
This subject today is going to include all of those. This gentleman, he's a Christian husband, homeschool dad, attorney, former military officer, providing legal guidance and expert criminal defense to military, federal law enforcement, and other patriots, former prosecutor,
JAG, and number one rated defense counsel in the Air Force. He runs a focused legal practice helping Americans preserve their religious freedom.
Very important. Equal protection under the law, also very important. And basic constitutional rights and criminal and administrative proceedings.
It's Davis. Now, let's say the last name, correct? Yonce. Is that correct,
Davis, or no? You got it. You got it. How are you, sir? I'm doing great.
Yeah. So that was kind of a long bond. I know you've done a lot. But can you just tell our listeners a little bit more about you maybe personally or your experiences and where you're coming from?
Yeah, absolutely. So first thing is I am a Christian. I am just incredibly grateful for God for the blessing of his election and my salvation.
I'm a husband. I have an amazing wife, Elizabeth, who's a Christian author.
We have two daughters that we homeschool and I come from a homeschool background. I grew up in a family that were sort of pioneers in homeschool when homeschool was essentially illegal in Pennsylvania.
And they fought back with the Legal Defense Association in the early days. So that's the background that I'm coming from and sort of baked into my
DNA. How I was raised was to be ready to take on these issues. Fast forward, I went to Liberty University for my undergrad, got a degree in government and then went to law school.
9 -11 happened when I was in law school. So I felt that it was my turn, my calling to join and serve and sort of be part of what my generation was doing in that battle.
And so that's what I did. So I was on active duty in the Air Force as a JAG military attorney for 11 years, kind of did everything
I wanted to do as a JAG. My last job on active duty after I deployed, I became the chief of the military justice division at the
Air Force JAG school. So I taught trial advocacy, criminal law, constitutional law to not only new
JAGs coming into the Air Force, but also sort of continuing education for all
JAGs in the Air Force on those subjects. From there, I transitioned, really wanted to get back home and put down roots in Pennsylvania where I grew up and kind of raised a family in one place.
So that's what we did. I worked in Pennsylvania for the Pennsylvania National Guard for a couple of years, transitioned to private practice, been in private practice since 2015.
And as of 21 December, I am retired from the United States Air Force Reserves as a
Lieutenant Colonel. So looking to even focus more time now that I don't have that reserve commitment anymore into these battles that are certainly facing us everywhere.
Wow. Yeah. And thank you for your service. You know, something rang true there. You know, I was homeschooled.
I'm an 80s kid. And I was homeschooled up until my junior year in high school.
And I remember we had to use the legal defense fund as well. We had social services at our door. Why aren't your kids in school?
It was the mid to late 80s. We were one of, I think, 10 families in a tri -county area, maybe one of 500 people in the tri -state area in the
Midwest that were homeschooling at the time. So I understand. We kind of have probably that same background.
I would say I think that set us up for success, though, as well, too. I mean, I homeschool all three of my kids.
Not one of them has set foot in a government school. And I think that sets us up for success, don't you?
Oh, absolutely. And, you know, I mean, a lot of it, it can come down to faith and what the priority and the importance of family is.
But it's also about what's the philosophy of education? What is even the purpose of education? You know, and in government schools, it feels much more like institutionalization and indoctrination than it does actual education and what that means.
Yeah. And just on a side note, out of personal interest, because I've always been interested in JAG, what are you mainly doing?
What kind of cases are you handling when you're doing that for the military? So the military, because it goes worldwide and because of the unique aspects of military law, you know, civilian attorneys aren't used to dealing with treason cases or desertion cases or AWOL cases or those kinds of things.
There's what's called the Uniform Code of Military Justice, which is a federal statute, essentially, that governs the conduct of military members and its own crimes code within the military.
So that's job number one for a JAG is to understand the Uniform Code of Military Justice and advise commanders in carrying out those military specific aspects of the law, crimes, etc.
And then JAGs branch out from there and JAGs do a lot operationally. So they advise commanders on the rule of law as it applies to warfare, rules of engagement, things like that.
So JAGs are expected, particularly in the Air Force, are expected to be generally expansive when it comes to all things military and understand how to how to advise command on those things well.
And I imagine that has helped you be successful in the private practice then with that type of experience, or how has that helped you be successful in your private practice?
Just having that broad knowledge? Yeah, I mean, I think that that broad knowledge is helpful.
One of the great things about the JAG Corps is just the training that they provide and not just like trial advocacy or legal training, but leadership training, right?
Strategic thinking, those things that I experienced in officer training and in the other training that I've done, you know, even having the opportunity to get a master's degree in military operational arts and science, that's just that just helps in life, right?
That sort of strategic leadership thinking, those things are great. But from a practical legal perspective, you know,
I was in two weeks after I got out of my initial JAG training, I was trying a court martial case at Lackland Air Force Base.
And so, you know, not everybody gets that opportunity in the military, but because of my assignments and everything else,
I mean, I prosecuted over 40 cases that went to trial in a year and a half, my first year and a half in the
Air Force. So that kind of experience is just invaluable as well. Yeah, and it sounds like the kind of things that you are in your private practice now that you are working with are things that we kind of want to talk about today and kind of get your perspective on.
You know, look at, we've said on this podcast very many times we are still, I would say we're still privileged here in the
United States with religious freedom. I think it's being squeezed a little bit. Obviously we can't, you know, we look to China, we look to Turkey, we look to Nigeria, Yemen, those places where they're actually under physical persecution.
But we are seeing in this country religious persecution, not to the same degree around the world, but to some extent.
And we're seeing things like, especially pro -life people being jailed or arrested.
I saw in Canada, now that's not here in the United States, but I saw in Canada just a couple of weeks ago, a lady was,
I think it was in Canada, she was arrested for thinking about praying. She was standing outside of an abortion clinic.
The officer came up to her and said, are you praying? She said, yes, in my head. And he said, about what? She said, you know, that this abortion facility was shut down and they arrested her.
I haven't followed up on what happened, but the fact of the matter is these things are kind of being poked and prodded, right?
We always see arrests or citations and they might back down and say, oh, we shouldn't have done that.
But the intent is there. And then on top of that with hate speech laws and sometimes speaking out against certain things, hate speech can now be classified.
If you say something against a certain group or sector, even against an abortion abortionist, we're seeing a really tightening around religious freedom.
What has been your experience in that Davis and how have you combated that? It's such a critical issue right now in this nation as we think through it, because we can look to Canada, we can look to the
UK, we can look to places where we see this issue coming and see some of the tactics that have been used.
But I want to start just with a foundational issue. The real foundational issue, I think, is we have lost a desire in our churches to talk about applying all of scripture to all of life, right?
We have fallen into heresies, two kingdoms heresies. We've fallen into this idea that somehow our faith, our belief shouldn't impact the secular world around us, right?
Whether that's politics, whether it's education or other things. Now, where does that come from? We spend a lot of time talking about where that comes from, but what we have to understand is the mainstream philosophy that we're dealing with, the mainstream religion that's out there is secular humanism, right?
And atheistic, so -called atheistic secular humanism always leads to tyranny and oppression.
It just does. You can fight me on that, but if you spend a few minutes and sit back and think about that statement, it holds true.
Everywhere it's happened, it holds true. So what we're seeing is as we're seeing a movement towards secular humanism, towards atheism, towards a separation from basic biblical principles, basic biblical law applied to all of life, we're seeing tyranny, and it's a soft tyranny in the
United States, but it is coming and it is becoming more and more intense. So it starts sort of big picture.
We see it in censorship, right? We see it in the FBI, working with Twitter, working with Facebook, working with Google to suppress certain messages and certain information that they disagree with, they don't want out there, that they categorize as disinformation or hate speech, and it begins there.
So those are sort of the soft tyranny. And then it moves, it moves to the era that we're moving into now, where we see issues with so -called hate crimes coming and being used in different ways, being used more expansively, and that creates a huge concern.
So, I mean, just to talk about hate crimes real quick, this idea of a hate crime, right?
It's the idea that we're going to say that it is more egregious, that it is more criminal, that it is aggravating if your crime, whether it's murder, whether it's something else, is motivated by a belief, right?
If there's a motive behind it, that we disagree with your motive somehow, or it's influenced by that motive, then that crime is worse.
So, you know, the federal definition of a hate crime is a crime that is motivated by bias towards religion, race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation.
Those are the categories that the federal government looks at, states look at, and then they say, okay, if you commit a crime, regardless of what the crime is, if you commit a crime and that's your motivation or even part of your motivation, then that dramatically increases the punishment for that crime.
So that's hate crime as a starting point. Yeah. And so what are your thoughts on that, the constitutionality of that legality of hate crime?
I've looked at that before and I go, that doesn't make any sense to me. I understand taking, you know, taking crimes and then labeling them by intent.
There's obviously a difference between murder and manslaughter, right? If, because we look at intent there, but to say, how do you know what is in my head if I commit a crime against someone and I don't verbally say it, and let's say the person is black or Latino or something like that, and they're saying ethically, this is a hate crime.
It seems like a very slippery slope or to me, unconstitutional that you're putting another label on top of something we already have a classification for.
What are your thoughts on that as an attorney, just in general on, in hate crimes? So I have a big problem with it.
And I kind of have several layers for my big, my big problem with it. One is just as a, as a basic practical concept, there's very little reason for more laws on the books in our nation as a whole, right?
When we, why are, why are we criminalizing everything? You know, there's a joke attorneys talk about where we say, you know, the average
American citizen violates several federal laws every day. They just don't know it.
And that seems like a joke, but in some respects, it's, it's not as much of a joke as you might think. So, so this constant idea of criminalizing and expanding criminalization as a general principle,
I think we have to be careful as a society in doing that. That's, that's the first thing. The second thing, and the most important thing when we talk about hate crimes to me is really an equal protection question, right?
We're saying, we're saying that somehow a crime is worse. We're placing a higher value on a victim because of a status, right?
So we're not just saying this is a murderer, this is an assault. What we're saying is that somehow we're, we're giving a different level of protection to certain types of people or certain types of circumstances.
So set aside the ideas of the difficult, practically of trying to figure out what a motivation is, what's driving something.
We're looking at a scenario where we have in equal outcomes. We have unequal weights and measures when we start bringing hate crime into it.
I mean, the example I would give was, was that is this, right? So if you and I went to a
Detroit Pistons basketball game, right? So we're sitting there, we're in the stands at the Detroit Pistons basketball game.
And there is I'm wearing a Seattle, you know, the Seattle supersonics, right?
That's the last Detroit Pistons game I went to, which tells you how old it is. Seattle supersonics anymore.
Right. Let's say, let's say I'm wearing a, you know, a Seattle supersonics
Jersey and you're not right. You're just wearing a black shirt and there's a guy behind us and there are words exchanged and he dumps beer on both of us.
Right. But he's wearing a Detroit Pistons Jersey. Okay. So he's committed assault. He's dumped a beer on us.
That's an assault. But then is it, let's just say it was a crime.
He was targeting me because I was wearing the Sonics shirt, right? Okay. So, so is the crime that happened to me, the same crime, getting beer poured on my head worse because I'm wearing a
Sonic shirt and he's motivated by his hatred for Sonics fans, or is it the same crime? I submit to you, it's the same crime.
So what we should be doing is looking at the crime, focusing on the factors involved in the crime and punishing crime for what it is, not trying to figure out what the motivation is, and then saying there's more or less value in a life.
There's more or less value in, you know, in privacy or freedom or other things based on status and sort of dividing status.
I think, you know, the, the idea that, you know, crime motivated by hate is, is worse for society.
We can have a debate about that, but we're still dividing everything. We're categorizing everything. And I don't think that's good for society either.
Really practically, it's an equal protection issue, but take it a step further. It can, it can absolutely have an impact on first amendment, free speech and religion, because, you know, now, if, if you have a scenario where someone's accused of a crime, it would not be unreasonable to say, okay, well, they were, you know, this, this individual,
I know I go out and I, I punch an abortion doctor, right? For whatever reason, it could, it doesn't matter why for now, but I just, there's a, there's a situation and, and I punch an abortion doctor.
Well, if the courts go in and say, well, wow, this guy has made comments about abortion, ending abortion.
And he goes through a very conservative church and his religious faith teaches abortions wrong. Hey, he fought against the vaccine mandate in the military because of his views on abortion.
They could easily prove that I targeted that abortion provider because of the church that I go to, right.
It could have nothing to do with it, but, but in that moment, they could take it. So there's this idea that, that our speech and other things could influence what happens.
So just on a practical, from a legal standpoint, from a constitutional standpoint, there are real concerns with hate crimes.
Yeah. So that's, that's kind of the next area I want to get into because my fear is with the hate crime laws, you kind of now have this bedrock foundation of these hate crime laws that have been around now for close to a decade,
I think in most States and at the federal level, you can correct me if I'm wrong there, but it feels that long anyway, maybe longer, but they're subjective, right?
That's the other issue is that you're now saying, like you said, if you take a stance, if I say, look at,
I don't want, I don't want a teacher to be able to take an 11 year old to, you know, to a certain place for some type of transgender therapy, or even now in the state of Michigan, we just passed proposal two at the last election.
I think a teacher can take them to get a surgery without parental consent under what we just passed as a constitutional amendment.
If I stand up to that, they could say, oh, well, you're transphobic. And now that's hate speech. And there's a crime committed with that.
So we see this huge thing, my long explanation for that. And what I want to ask you is how do we combat that?
Because we see this coming. It's been, it's been here for a long time, but you're going to see hate speech laws.
You're going to see other laws used against believers who say, who stand on the word of God and say, no, there is right, there is wrong.
Morality is not subjective. God is the objective moral lawgiver. We are to obey him.
We see it now, people who are protesting abortions getting arrested, people who stand up and say,
I don't think you should be able to mutilate a young child because they think they're a different gender. That's coming very quickly to where that might be illegal to say, being able to prosecute at least.
What do we do? Because you stand up for people like that and you fight in court for people like that.
You have a ministry, you're a believer or just, you know, just a believer. What do we do? We pray.
Big question. Yeah. Yeah. No. Right. Right. There's, there's so much, I mean, we, we pray.
We, we start with prayer. We, we start with a focus on understanding that what we're dealing with.
But I think critically, critically, we have lost this fight already in so many churches.
So, so to me, there are legal solutions. There are legal ideas that we can talk about, but it really does start with getting back, getting back to churches and looking for true, meaningful revival in churches.
Because again, I go back to this idea of, you know, two kingdoms, heresy, this, this idea that we shouldn't get our hands dirty with what's going on in the world around us.
That is so much of a problem because we don't have Christian men and women that are equipped to even take on this.
And we've advocated, you know, we've stepped away and we've conceded in large part in society, this idea that what we believe is separate from what should be in the law, even just, you know, throwing out ideas like we can't legislate morality, things like that.
When the truth is every law, every law has a morality behind it. There is no law without a morality.
It's a question of what morality, whose morality, God's law or man's law. And that's all there.
So I think that's critical. We have to educate pastors. We have to educate church leaders. We have to, you know, push hard to have these grassroots movements that push back.
I think that's a starting point. Legally, we need to focus on electing local leaders, right?
This is where we think about county sheriffs. And really, I mean, when was the last time any of us, besides people that are attorneys, spent a lot of time thinking about DAs, right?
The district attorney, you know, how is your district attorney selected? Are they popularly elected? What does that look like?
What is the selection process in your local county? Because guess who at the county level is making prosecution decisions?
It's the district attorney. The district attorney is the one that's going to be interpreting these laws and just exercising prosecutorial discretion and deciding whether or not hate crimes, you know, enhancements and things like that come in.
So a lot of it does have to do with political involvement in those races.
So what, you know, how does your local district attorney intend to address these issues? How are they going to enforce the law?
What charges are they going to bring? All of that plays a huge part. So that's a huge thing is get involved at that local level.
Sure, school board, you know, we've seen school board activism have an impact. County sheriffs are huge, but then what about these local
DAs and what's their perspective on this? What kinds of things are they going to go after? That's huge.
Yeah, I would just add there too, as a duly elected county commissioner since 2016, those positions are very important as well too, because they're the legislative, we are the legislative branch of the county and we oversee the budget of the sheriff.
We oversee the budget of the health department. A very quick story I'll tell you, because I think it's interesting to you in your field is in January of 2020,
I introduced a resolution, which is essentially a law ordinance for the county that was very pro -second amendment saying we would not stand for any unconstitutional taking of the right to own a weapon.
I had some Democratic commissioners on the board basically say absolutely, no one get all upset.
Well we had three, four, five hundred people every week coming in to every advocate saying look at this needs to be passed.
We went back, rewrote it with the Democrats. It came out even more stringent to where it said if the sheriff does anything unconstitutional, we won't, will not fund you.
And the Democrats agreed to it. We said okay, yeah, I got more than we wanted. We passed it.
Two months later, here comes COVID. In Michigan, if you don't know the story, one of the most draconian lockdowns.
We were just like California. I mean our governor was insane. Our sheriff called us up and said hey, we don't want to enforce these because if this is deemed unconstitutional, you're not going to fund us.
And we were one of the counties in Michigan that we weren't handing out tickets. We weren't enforcing, you know, six foot and all that.
Because of something I had introduced that I thought was going to be second amendment, two to three months later, the
Lord uses it for COVID stuff. And of course the law that our governor then said she was using to enforce lockdowns, it went through the court system.
It was unconstitutional. So that's an example very quickly of what you just said. It's kind of off subject, but what you just I'm involved in the local.
I'm a believer. I believe Christ is ruling and reigning now, but I also believe I have a duty to not only preach the gospel, but to be in policy and legislative, you know, all these things in my community.
And that was something to where at the local level, we could affect some change. So you're absolutely right there.
So with that being said, you're at the local level. I want to shift gears a little bit, get involved there, but I want to shift gears because you have actually helped people with the vaccine mandates and the religious exemptions.
And the reason I'm bringing this up is because we talked about COVID and everyone goes, gosh, we're tired of COVID. It's been two years.
We're done with it. But I think Davis, you understand this. Anytime in legislative policy, it's almost like they're trying to set precedent, almost like case law.
Once they do it, they'll go back to it. And in 2020, they saw that they could lock down people, take businesses, lock down businesses.
It's only going to be a matter of time before we probably see something like this again. I have a friend that was actually on this podcast, not going to say his name.
He had to get a religious exemption. He worked for a major hospital in the area. And he said they grilled him,
Davis. It was unbelievable. Why don't you take vitamins? You put that in your body. Why won't you put this in your body? They were really trying to test the validity of if it was hard, if he truly held to his religious beliefs.
He was one out of 480 that got the religious exemption because he is a strong believer.
And he just said, look, it's none of your business. This is essentially my belief. But my point is you had a major medical provider doing that to believers in 2020 and 2021.
I think it's going to come back again. Maybe it won't be with a vaccine. It might be some other way. What is my question is, what does someone do if they're in that situation or they need religious exemptions for vaccines or something else?
What do you think there? So I think there's a couple of pieces. There's sort of the legal aspect of it, and then there's the practical.
So let's start with the practical first. Whenever you're in that situation,
I always encourage people to try to ensure and find out if they are, make sure that you're not alone.
And the reason that I say that is if you can find a way to not be alone in pushing back against an employer or otherwise, that we've seen consistently,
I've worked with a lot of people where that's had a huge impact. It's one thing if it's you alone asking for an exemption, if it's you alone saying no, pushing back.
But if all of a sudden, depending on the size of the business, if it's four, five, 10, 15, it has a practical business impact.
So practically speaking, what we've learned from this, one of the things that I've learned is you have to build community, right?
You have to have these conversations, you have to prepare, you have to talk through these things. So I think just the idea that, hey,
I'm willing to take a stand when it comes to my religious faith, even if it could potentially cost me a job,
I'm willing to do that. And I've thought through that ahead of time so that I'm ready. And having a community around you like that, that's really, really important.
But the other piece is, as it comes down to it, the reality that we learned through COVID and being involved in many of these cases is, the employers took a lot of different approaches to these.
Most employers really didn't know what to do. And a lot of them got bad legal advice, right? A lot of them got really bad legal advice because there was this thought process.
And I mean, I don't want to be too critical, but there were a lot of mainstream so -called evangelical leaders who were saying things that were really, really critical, almost abusively so of anyone that wasn't just immediately running out and getting an experimental job.
Who wanted to exercise some discernment. Yeah. Right. And so there were a lot of secular people who just didn't think that people who weren't getting the vaccine were sincere in their religious faith.
I mean, they just didn't. They thought it was just political or whatever. They're like, oh, the Pope says it's okay. Or, oh, Russell Moore or whoever says, go get jabbed as many times as possible.
Whatever it is. So I do think there was some in that, but there was just a lot of this idea that somehow religious freedom in this country is based on what you believe or the sincerity or belief as opposed to what the real standard is.
So the example that I give, it seems like kind of a weird example, but religious freedom in our nation, our history isn't about what you believe.
It's about the sincerity of that belief and whether or not you live your life consistent with it.
So that's really the test with accommodation. Is this something that's central to his faith? So a dumb example is this,
I could believe that the moon is made out of cheese and I could worship the cheese moon
God. That could be my belief system. Well, what does that really mean? Well, it means I don't eat dairy products.
I don't eat dairy products because that would be disrespectful to the cheese moon God. So I could come to my employer and say,
Hey, you know, I, I need an accommodation because I, I, I, I can't, you know,
I can't serve dairy products and I can't eat dairy products, whatever it is, whatever reason why I need an exemption that's related to dairy products.
And maybe it's, you know, the flu vaccine has, has dairy products in it and I can't, and I can't take them.
It would be reasonable for my employee or to say, okay, not to comment about whether my beliefs are silly or ridiculous or whatever, but to say, well, do you, do you eat, do you consume dairy products?
Right. That question would be reasonable. And I could say, no, I haven't, you know, since I converted a year ago,
I have not, um, I haven't consumed a single, you know, intentionally consumed a single dairy product.
Therefore, there we go. So there's that, that sincerity that's a part of this. Um, that's really the test.
It's not about what you believe. So what we saw is employers giving, giving, you know, given legal advice to grill people and ask these questions.
Well, have you taken other vaccines? Have you taken vitamins? One of the things we learned just through this whole COVID process is we learned how intimately involved abortion is in so many medical products, right?
I mean, this is kind of, it wasn't something I was, I was tracking that was as, as broad as it was.
I mean, 2015, 16, I became aware of some of these issues, but there's a whole lot of aborted fetal cell tissue testing that goes into a whole lot of medical products and other things.
And that's kind of a longer conversation on how we, we push back against that. But a lot of people just didn't know.
I mean, most of my military clients had no idea until they started seeing the research and they're like, oh my goodness.
Yeah. There's a couple other vaccines that I've taken in the military. If I had known I wouldn't take,
I wouldn't take again. I wouldn't take now. So part of it is just a lack of understanding of the law, but the encouraging thing
I will say is this, every, every client that I worked with that works for a private business here in Pennsylvania, almost all of them, this is fascinating, right?
Almost all of them, when they initially submitted their religious accommodation, once it was looked at, it was denied.
As soon as they, they appealed it, got an attorney involved just to write a letter to say, hey, you know, this seems like they're violating your religious freedom.
They were granted, they were granted, they were consistently granted. But some of it's just educating folks on the law and helping them understand what the law is and how it applies in these cases.
Yeah. Wow. This, this is big, heavy stuff. So we just have a couple minutes left here. So let's wrap this up, put bookends on this episode.
And why don't you give us a final word, Davis? And if we have listeners right now that are believers and that might have some fear and anxiety about this, or just want to know more about what they can do to protect themselves, their ministries, give us the final word.
And then also, if you could throw out your social media and places, people can find you if they need to connect with you in any way or, or use you for a resource.
Yeah. So, so what I would say to folks that are out there that are worried about these issues is this is, is, you know, the fact that you're aware is a great place to start, right?
So it's time to be talking to our churches. It's time to be talking to pastors. It's time to be coming together, having these conversations and being aware of these issues so that we can get engaged.
It's, you know, training opportunities are out there. Let's get involved. Let's get involved at the local level.
Let's not be afraid of that so that we can influence culture. You know, Christ is king. God is reigning.
Let's, let's behave like that as Christians. Let's, let's share the blessings that come from all of scripture for all of life.
So that, that would be a huge current encouragement. For me, best way to follow me on Twitter is at Davis Yance.
You can also check out our website, themilitarycouncil .com, themilitarycouncil .com is my website.
We're going to be doing some, some more things in 2023 that we can talk about. One of the things we're looking at is how to expand education and training in these areas for military members, federal law enforcement, other federal agents, so that we're prepared for the next time we see something like COVID come in.
But the biggest thing people can do, Christians that are, that are really sincere about this is get educated and understand good theology when it comes to biblical law and how it applies to society and life.
Read people like Joe Boot, James White, get involved, right? Get, think about those people, read those books, pick up those books so that you can educate your family, educate your churches, and you'll be prepared to, to engage in a meaningful way, because we need a revival, not just a gospel revival, not just people getting saved.
We need a revival in our churches to understand the impact that we are called to have. What our calling to go into all the world and make disciples really is, because we're going to have to make more of these stands.
The, the blessing in these stands is the incredible amount of revival we've seen, the revival I've seen in, in the military.
It's amazing the thousands of people that have come together to take a stand. They're willing to sacrifice careers, retirements, and everything for this.
That's an encouragement to me, and I think we're going to see that in other areas of society, but we have to be ready to take a stand.
We have to be educated and willing to get involved, and it starts at the local level. Amen, amen.
Well, Davis, thank you so much for taking time and being here with us, and you're absolutely right. When Joe Boot was on the podcast, he's, he's just amazing, so any listener out there, make sure you go check him out, read his stuff.
I think he's Ezra, Ezra Institute is his ministry. He's amazing, but Davis, you were amazing.
Thank you so much for coming on, sharing your institutional knowledge with us. Yeah, if you got stuff going on in 2023, brother, come back on anytime.
Let's talk about it. Let's promote you, make sure more people know who you are as well. We appreciate you.
Guys, once again, thanks so much for listening. We appreciate you guys, too, because you email us, you, you post on social media, you say, what about this?
Can you get this guy on? And this was a subject that we wanted to talk about here on the podcast, so it was awesome for you to come on.
So, Davis, thanks for being here. Thanks, brother. All right, guys, as always, we appreciate you and God bless.
Be sure to follow us on Facebook and Instagram at dead men walking podcast for full video podcast episodes and clips or email us at dead men walking podcast at gmail .com