A Special Message From Mrs. Erika Kirk

00:00:03 Speaker 1: My name is Charlie kirk I run the largest pro American student organization in the country, fighting for the future of our republic. 00:00:11 Speaker 2: My call is to fight evil and to proclaim truth. 00:00:14 Speaker 1: If the most important thing for you is just feeling good, you're going to end up miserable. But if the most important thing is doing good, you'll end up purposeful. College is a scam, everybody. You got to stop sending your kids to college. You should get married as young as possible and have as many kids as possible. Go start at turning point. You would say college chapter. Go start aturning point, yould say high school chapter. Go find out how your church can get involved. Sign up and become an activist. I gave my life to the Lord in fifth grade, most important decision I ever made in my life, and I encourage you to do the same. 00:00:45 Speaker 2: Here I am Lord, Use me. Buckle up, everybody, Here we go. 00:00:56 Speaker 1: Noble Gold Investments is the official gold sponsor of the Charlie Kirkshaw, a company that specializes in gold I rays and physical delivery of precious metals. Learn how you could protect your wealth with Noble Gold Investments at noblegold investments dot Com. That is Noblegoldinvestments dot Com. You guys are welcome to ask anything, open mic, disagreement, most welcome. You disagree, come to the front of the line. You disagree, come to the front of the line. If you disagree, go to the front of the line. You guys know how it works. You disagree, go to the line. We'll have a great conversation here. Who are you? My name is Charlie Kirk, and I love America because I love talking with people I disagree with? 00:01:35 Speaker 2: What have you done for your country? 00:01:36 Speaker 1: Start an organization that's now in a thousand plus campuses to save the greatest culture in country. 00:01:41 Speaker 2: Every two exists. 00:01:41 Speaker 1: I love talking for people I disagree, though, When people stop talking, that's when you get violence. That's when civil war happens. 00:01:49 Speaker 3: Seems to me that nothing will ever be enough for the evil in this world. Our country has become unrecognizable. These people have perverted the truth to the point that they motivated the murder of my husband. They have continuously tried to assassinate the president, and anyone who stands in their way is labeled hateful, racist, fascist, and every other trigger word that is grossly dishonest. We want the best for our country. 00:02:20 Speaker 2: They don't. 00:02:22 Speaker 4: This is why. 00:02:22 Speaker 3: Charlie started turning Point USA in the first place. He didn't trust the radicalized liberal teachers. And this past Saturday, it was a school. 00:02:31 Speaker 5: Teacher, of all people, a school teacher. 00:02:34 Speaker 3: That attempted to change our history for the worst with bullets. And everyone is asking why I even went to the White House Correspondent Center, and it was because many of the journalists in that room have attempted to dehumanize me, and I wanted to meet some of them face to face. Quite frankly, why have a conversation about me when you can have a conversation with me. So, for example, a journalist from the Daily Mail came up to me. She introduced herself and she was saying she. 00:03:05 Speaker 4: Was very gracious. 00:03:06 Speaker 3: She was saying, you look so beautiful. I'm so sorry for your loss, to which I replied, it is so nice to put a name to the face, especially with all of the slander, the lies, accusations that are out there surrounding my husband's murder and myself. And I said to her, you know what's so interesting, this is my first time at the White House Correspondent Sinner, and I find it so fascinating the dynamic that is going on right now, because everyone is all dressed up, and you guys are co mingling in and out of each other's cocktail parties, and so for one night you are able to put aside all of your differences for the sake of freedom of speech, and then by Monday morning things will go back to being an absolute bloodbath between all of you. She replied, literally, she said, I know, isn't it special? 00:04:04 Speaker 6: Right? 00:04:05 Speaker 3: Isn't tonight so special? And following that conversation, it was time to take our seats and we went into the big ballroom where the dinner was. And one of the first things I noticed when I walked into that room was quite literally the proximity of the opposing outlets to one another. So you have one table here that's Politico, and another table here that's Fox, and another table here that's Wappo, and you're all cramped together, elbow to elbow. And to make the night even more of a spectacle, every single ten person table had ten bottles of wine. And the president of the White House Correspondence Association, she did a great job of trying to make the evening had that feeling of Americana. You know, we were in a room celebrating freedom of speech despite our differences, and the US Marine band performed the national anthems so beautifully, and then shortly thereafter, gunshots rang out and total chaos ensued. And you guys have all seen what happened next, because there are a thousand videos of it. So let's discuss that fact for a second. If you were in that room, you had no way of knowing what the status of the shooter was, how many there were, or honestly, really anything. It was just utter chaos. And so during an active shooting, these journalists are using their phones to find moments to capture for clips. They were so concerned about getting a video in a room with an active shooter that they could have accidentally and quite literally filmed themselves being shot. Many of those people have become so desensitized that fight or flight became secondary to the opportunity of putting themselves into the story, which ironically breaks the number one rule of journals. And again, ironically enough, the shooter was a teacher. You have these people who are supposed to be teaching our children the future of this country, and he's so unhinged that he is able to teach children by day and then attempt to murder the President of the United States by night. And in his manifesto he starts by contextualizing himself by saying, I am a citizen of the United States of America. And while we may have big problems with the legal immigration in this country, I have to tell you we have an even bigger problem when it comes to the systemic and doctrination and radicalization of our own citizens. This is what got my husband killed, This is what has led to three legitimate attempts on President Trump's life. And I can speak firsthand to that unbearable toll that this must take on our first lady. There has never been a president who has faced this many assassination attempts in Americans' entire history, and after each one, the reaction from the far left has been, at best a shrug and in some cases, a sick disappointment that the shooter was unsuccessful. We are all human beings, and if you can, just if you can just pause and just take a minute and ask yourself, how would you feel if even just one person made cruel jokes about the attempted murder of your loved one. That is what Jimmy Kimmel did to the first lady. He said that she had the glow of an expected widow, of an expected widow just forty eight hours before that nightmare almost became a reality. And this culture we're living in absorbs disagreement as a form of personal betrayal. It turns having an opposing viewpoint into a moral crime worthy of punishment. And here's what I've realized through all of this, truly, having lived through quite literal hell these past seven months, if you strip someone of their humanity long enough, you will arrive at the chilling conclusion that they don't deserve to exist at all. Every morning I wake up to a new headline lying about me. 00:08:47 Speaker 4: I have. 00:08:49 Speaker 3: Comedians dressing up in whiteface. I have people saying I'm not fit to be CEO, and I have canvass Owens claiming I murdered my husband, and the list goes on and on and on. 00:09:09 Speaker 4: There is a serious. 00:09:10 Speaker 3: Epidemic of dehumanization plaguing this country. The most unthinkable tragedies have now become commonplace in our daily headlines, and yet the media finds a way to conveniently explain away violence this is what we're up against. This is what we're up against. What is happening right now is something none of us can afford to ignore. The evil forces working to divide us, to distract us, and to pull us apart has never been stronger. This is a moment for Americans to come together and decide what kind of country we are going to be before we lose our country altogether. In Romans, Chapter twelve, verse twenty one, it says, do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good. And this is why my husband and created Turning Point USA, so we could have civil discourse and debate and open dialogue, because when we stopped talking to each other, bad things happen. I am choosing to fight for America, for my children, for your children, and for our humanity because we all need to do our part, and by the grace of God, we will succeed and America will remain what she was always called to be, a shining city on a hill, a light to the world. So let me give you a perfect example of how it's done. My husband did it best and left us the blueprint on how to have uncomfortable conversations with those who disagree, but. 00:10:43 Speaker 2: Here we go. 00:10:44 Speaker 4: So my sense today is on immigration. I think that immigration contributes a lot to America. So my parents did come here legally, and they right now are in the process again and it takes a long time. No, they came here legally, like they came with the RISA and now they're renewing it and then to different process right now. But so I'm really religious. I'm Catholic. My parents grew me up that way. And in Matthew two thirteen through fifteen, it talks about how Jesus had to flee Nazareth or no Bethlehem. Sorry, he had to flee because someone was going to die and they were looking to kill him. And he had to flee his own country and leave everything behind because an angel spoke to Mary and Joseph that they should leave. So a lot of people do that. That's why they immigrate to the United States. A lot of people have to leave everything behind because not everyone just wants to pack up all the things and leave right now, I personally would hate if I had to sell my car, my house, leave my parents, leave my friends, and leave everyone. So I just want to know what your stantus on that, just because in the Bible, it talks about. 00:11:42 Speaker 2: That, right. 00:11:43 Speaker 1: So first of all, Jesus actually didn't emigrate. He stayed within the confines of the Roman Empire because Egypt was actually other under Roman jurisdiction. That's a separate point. But there are plenty of verses that says you should welcome the stranger, and so I will grant you that. I guess the first point, the first point I would have to ask is should immigration always benefit the home country? 00:12:03 Speaker 4: I think so yes, And that is one thing that I looked into. So there are immigrants right now working here, correct, and they get some of their paycheck cut off right because of Social Security and all those benefits. But they don't get those benefits because they're illegal. 00:12:16 Speaker 1: Do you mean legal or illegal immigrants? That distinction is very important. 00:12:20 Speaker 4: Illegal you get those benefits. 00:12:22 Speaker 2: So let's just be clear. 00:12:23 Speaker 1: If they have a social Security number, how'd they get that the right way? They stole it, don't You don't get a social Security number as any illegal period, It does not happen. They stole it. So that's an act of theft. And so they stole an American social Security number to be able to work here, which drives down wages, which drives down opportunity costs. But even beyond that, we just have to look at their action. They were not invited to come to this country. They broke in line, they cut in line, and we should not reward line cutters or border jumpers. We should reward people like your parents that actually came here legally to this country. 00:13:03 Speaker 4: Yeah. I understand that point, I really do. But sometimes people generally need to leave their country because in like my mother's case, for instance, there was like a terrorist attack on my family and that's the reason my mom had to come. And thankfully she did get it immediately. But now I've heard of so many stories where people have to wait like ten years, twenty years, even thirty years. Like my grandma right now is trying to get the process, and thankfully she is now, but it's taken her about ten years now, and she makes enough money in her country and she just wants to come here as a tourist. That's the main reason. And I do understand that. I think that My main point is at how we should implement more money into the immigration system because Trump's zero tolerance policy that just felt cruel because there's a lot of people here that are doing well and zero tolerance, they just had to leave the country. I feel like that was imfumente of him. 00:13:50 Speaker 1: Yeah, but it's not their country though, and that's the So let me just like, here's it. If I went to Mexico without being invited or allowed, and I took a job and the Mexican government found out, what would the Mexican government do to me? I'm not sure they would send me back to America. 00:14:08 Speaker 4: And why was the reason you left the US first? 00:14:11 Speaker 1: So? 00:14:11 Speaker 2: Reason? 00:14:11 Speaker 1: That's an interesting thing. Is there ever a legitimate reason, in your opinion to commit a crime? 00:14:18 Speaker 7: No? 00:14:19 Speaker 1: Well, then the reason doesn't matter because under that say, so, can you rob a bank because you wish. 00:14:24 Speaker 2: You had more money? 00:14:25 Speaker 8: No? 00:14:26 Speaker 4: You work harder. 00:14:27 Speaker 1: Then why doesn't that moral standard applied immigration? 00:14:30 Speaker 4: Because the system is it isn't doing its job. That's why I think we should implement more money because there is some people like I do get it. You know, some people come here and then I do admit some of them commit crime, but not all of them. 00:14:41 Speaker 1: No, No, but they're all criminals if they came illegally, that's the distinction. By definition, they're breaking federal law eight USC. Thirteen twelve. Just their presence here is against the law. Would you be okay welcoming in five hundred million people into America? 00:14:55 Speaker 4: That's why we which you implement the system to undercent Emis. 00:14:57 Speaker 2: No, you got to kake. 00:14:58 Speaker 1: Do you think five hundred million people would be too many people? 00:15:01 Speaker 4: Five hundred million? I don't even think that would fit the United States? 00:15:04 Speaker 1: I agree, And that's the point is that if everyone, all of a sudden declared that their life was in danger, we'd have to let in like all of Nicaragua, all of Honduras, almost all of Venezuela, the standard all of a sudden starts falling apart. And we find that people lie about this, they deceive it. Here's my perspective. Why don't we try to empower those people to make the countries they're coming from greater and strong or else this problem will actually never be fixed at the root level. 00:15:29 Speaker 2: Does that make sense? 00:15:31 Speaker 4: It does make sense, and I wish it was that easy. So for instance, I am part Peruvian and in Peru, so they were having a presidential election and the president who was going to win was better for the country and would help out a lot more. But since it's corrupt, they made the other president win. They sent him death threats, nearly almost killed him. He had to fake his death and leave, and they jailed her. They jailed her completely, and they let the guy win. That is why it's corrupt. It's hard to fix a country when there's no help towards it. So Peru was. They were rooting for the good president. They were rooting to build their system back up, but the other president it was rigged. It was completely rigged. 00:16:10 Speaker 1: So does it make it better or worse if millions of people leave that country for Peru? 00:16:17 Speaker 4: Can you, like, what do you mean by three million. 00:16:19 Speaker 1: People left Peru? Does Peru get greater or weaker? Stronger or weaker? 00:16:26 Speaker 8: Neither? 00:16:27 Speaker 4: I mean, it's in a weak state right now. 00:16:29 Speaker 1: I mean, it's pretty obvious. I'm trying to even say that mass immigration is. 00:16:33 Speaker 2: Bad for everybody. 00:16:34 Speaker 1: It's bad for America, and it's bad for the country that people are leaving from. The only difference is that they send back American money through remittances that actually subsidize this entire thing. Let me ask one final question. If somebody comes into America without invitation and they are illegal, what do you think the penalty should be? 00:16:52 Speaker 4: I think it's humane to look at their case and why they had to leave everything they've ever known. 00:16:57 Speaker 1: We believe that we should send them back to their country origin. 00:17:04 Speaker 4: I just want to make one more final point. So I do understand that, But my final point is that do you agree that we should implement more money to the immigration so well? 00:17:12 Speaker 1: I think we should have no immigrants in the country for the next ten years. We have way too many people in this country. And I'll prove it to you here in California. Your hospitals are overrun, your schools are overrun. Do you guys agree that you have a crowded state right now? We are a California is a cluttered state with social services that are being strained, and we need a pause on all immigration in my opinion, to metaphorically digest the major meal that we just ate, or else we are going to have a major, major assimilation problem, cultural problem, cohesion problem, all sorts of issues. And I know this is a provocative thing to say, but immigration is something that you use as a way to benefit the homeland. 00:17:58 Speaker 2: You don't have to have immigration. 00:18:00 Speaker 4: But just as an example, my parents came here, like I said, legally zero dollars and they have benefited so much of the country. They have made so much, like one hundreds and thousand dollars. 00:18:09 Speaker 2: Praise God. That's the American dream. 00:18:11 Speaker 4: It is and it's just like a hard thing. 00:18:12 Speaker 1: And I want American booring young people from UC Riverside to also have that American dream and not have to compete against foreigners for that. 00:18:20 Speaker 2: Thank you for your time. 00:18:21 Speaker 4: Can I say one point? 00:18:22 Speaker 2: We have a long line? 00:18:23 Speaker 4: Thank you really quick though. 00:18:25 Speaker 1: Okay again, what is it? 00:18:26 Speaker 7: Yeah? 00:18:26 Speaker 4: Sorry, okay, I understand the American dream is hard. My parents my mom was pregnant, working two jobs one day and she sacrificed everything and now she has more money than the average American. 00:18:36 Speaker 1: Praise God. That is the American dream. Thank you very much, Thank you. 00:18:40 Speaker 7: I want to talk about the debate of abortion, so I know that it's something very controversial. Some people are pro choice, some people are pro life. Before I start, I want to make sure that I understand your opinion fully, so I don't take you know what I've heard online? What is your stance on abortion? 00:18:58 Speaker 1: Life begins at conception? 00:19:00 Speaker 8: Okay, so where do you so? Conception? So is that when sperm enters the egg? 00:19:04 Speaker 1: Is that during six, when new DNA is formed. 00:19:07 Speaker 7: Okay, when new DNA is formed. So the egg by itself you don't think is anything? Sorry, the egg of a woman by itself. 00:19:14 Speaker 1: Do you think it's a it's something, but it's not a life correct? 00:19:16 Speaker 8: Okay, that's okay. 00:19:18 Speaker 7: So my question is when you talk about abortion, why you think you so, Why you support it, Why you don't support it? Sorry, why you don't support it? What do you use as your evidence? You use scientific evidence? Do you talk about the Bible? 00:19:31 Speaker 1: Do you use both mainly self scientific and self evident reason? 00:19:35 Speaker 8: Okay? So are you someone who's a follower of the Bible. 00:19:38 Speaker 1: I am, but that's not relevant to this discussion. 00:19:41 Speaker 2: But we could talk about it if you like. 00:19:42 Speaker 7: I find irrelevant because when I'm going to talk about abortion, there's there's quotes in the Bible that I think support pro choice in my opinion. 00:19:54 Speaker 8: Bible Exodus. 00:19:58 Speaker 7: Exodus twenty one one twenty two through twenty five, when men strive together and hit a pregnant woman so that her child come out so miscarriage. But there's no harm to the woman. The one who hit her shall surely be fined, as the woman's husband shall impose on him, and he shall pay as the judgees determined. But if there is harm to the woman, you shall pay life for life, foot for foot, burned for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe. So I know that that can be interpreted different ways. The Bible is can interpret him anyways, different there's different types, different interpretations. But this says if a person causes a miscarriage through a woman, that they will pay for the abortion. So they they will pay, another one will punish them. 00:20:44 Speaker 1: That is not what this law says. But let me us ask, are you a Christian? 00:20:47 Speaker 8: Yes? 00:20:47 Speaker 2: Okay? Then continue, So so you believe word of God? 00:20:53 Speaker 1: Yes, okay, good? 00:20:54 Speaker 2: Yes. 00:20:55 Speaker 7: So it says that as the woman's husband, shal impose on him and he shall pay as the judges determined. So the judge is determined, and it's talking about the husband. So therefore it's talking about a person, not God himself, not his judgment. So it's saying, if someone has an abortion, we have the right to choose what to do to them. 00:21:13 Speaker 2: Right, And you say it was a miscarriage, not an abortion. 00:21:16 Speaker 7: It says when man strive together and hit a pregnant woman, so that's causing her to lose the baby. That's outside cause, outside cause. Therefore, it could mean abortion, because some people find that abbressive abortion is through violence such as hitting, because not everyone has access. 00:21:34 Speaker 1: To medical for them to kill the baby. 00:21:37 Speaker 7: It's unclarified, so that I cannot tell you it's unclarified. However, what I will say is that it says that it's the judges determine, the husband determines, So God's not making the choice for us what to do with the person who does that to someone's child does that to their own child. 00:21:57 Speaker 8: But it does say that if the woman. 00:21:59 Speaker 7: Is home arms her herself, not the child, then they are liable by God their life for her life, their foot for her foot. So what I'm saying is if somebody needs an abortion for health care, Let's say a woman baby is not gonna make it, and if the baby stays in her womb, she will die, and they refuse her an abortion, they refuse her that health care and she dies. 00:22:21 Speaker 8: Should the doctor be liable under God? 00:22:25 Speaker 1: First of all this those instances don't happen, So let's just be clear. No, See, you guys are so propagandized by this that only happens in a very rare case of the breaking of the uteriation. 00:22:34 Speaker 8: It does happen. 00:22:35 Speaker 1: But no, but where the baby is already dead, And that's the point, is that the baby is already dead. That's a removal of a carcass of the baby. 00:22:42 Speaker 8: No, it's not. 00:22:43 Speaker 2: That's incorrect. No it's not. No, it's not. 00:22:45 Speaker 1: A removal of a carcass of a baby. Is not an abortion. Those are two technically different things. It is not a DNA. It is not a DNA is something completely different. But then, if you want to talk about scripture, do you think we are bound to all six hundred thirteen levitical laws? 00:23:03 Speaker 7: Yes, if you're a follower of the Bible, you cannot pick and choose what you follow. 00:23:06 Speaker 1: Oh so you eat kosher? You cannot you eat kosher? No? Well, I thought you were bound to all six hundred thirteen laws. 00:23:13 Speaker 8: I'm not perfect. I'm sinner. Everyone hears a sinner. 00:23:16 Speaker 1: But are we bound to it? Do you think Christian should eat kosher? 00:23:18 Speaker 8: Choose to follow the Bible? You cannot pick and choose. 00:23:22 Speaker 1: What you of course, but we do believe in a New Covenant, Old Covenant. So there's three types of Old Testament laws, right, there's ceremonial, there's civil and moral. So ceremonial laws we do not honor civil we consider moral. 00:23:34 Speaker 8: We upstate it. Guys, do humans decide what to follow in God? 00:23:37 Speaker 1: Because Christ is actual, It's not us, It's not humans. So Paul actually authored in the Book of Colossians, that's a human right inspired by the Holy Spirit, which wrote the Bible. The ordinances of Moses are nailed to the cross. Secondly, Christ our Lord, repeated nine out of ten of the nine out of ten of the ten commandments, and he said, all the laws of the Prophet hang upon the two teachings of Bus nineteen and Deuteronomy six. But now I equally have to challenge you with scripture in Luke one, when Elizabeth came in contact with Mary and both were babies, what did it say that John the Baptist did. 00:24:16 Speaker 8: I cannot tell you that he leapt? 00:24:19 Speaker 2: Okay, do non babies leap? 00:24:25 Speaker 8: I don't understand the question I'm. 00:24:26 Speaker 2: Going to be honest with. 00:24:27 Speaker 1: Isn't it a baby then worthy of protection if they're leaping? 00:24:32 Speaker 8: I suppose yes. 00:24:34 Speaker 1: And it was the Greek word breafos, which literally means baby, intentionally used throughout hold on and Jeremiah says, I knew you before you were in the womb in sa I think one thirty nine. It's one of the most intricate verses about the detail of our formation process as human beings. And finally, because of science, because of biology, we know that human life begins at that spark of new DNA, and God says do not murder. And it's incumbent on Christians that therefore tech that life. 00:25:01 Speaker 7: Okay, So my my biggest question is I'm not saying that all abortion is valid. I feel like that's a for everyone to decide. But in the most even if it's very small percentage, in the very small percentage, that a baby is alive, but it has to be aborted for the sake of the mother. 00:25:18 Speaker 2: What do you think see section? What is a C section? 00:25:22 Speaker 8: A C section is when you cut them with mother's. 00:25:24 Speaker 1: Wait, why don't they do that instead of the abortion? 00:25:26 Speaker 8: Because it could be equally as dangerous. 00:25:28 Speaker 1: Wrong, it's much safer than an abortion and quicker. 00:25:30 Speaker 8: Do you have evidence? 00:25:31 Speaker 1: I mean, yes, it's it's it's self evident. 00:25:34 Speaker 8: Can you tell me? 00:25:35 Speaker 1: I mean again, I there's plenty of people, he has plenty of people that are in medicine can tell you, but like to be very clear, think about it. Every hospital is equipped to do sea sections. You have to go to a specific place for an abortion and a C section. One third out of everyone in this audience was born by C section. C sections save lives, they do not terminate lives. And so when they say we must abort the baby, thanks to modern technolog that's actually a false choice. You could take the baby out of the environment and try to save its life as a cesarean section. 00:26:06 Speaker 7: What if when the sea section happens, the baby's not able to survive on its own no matter what. 00:26:10 Speaker 1: Okay, Well, then that's a separate circumstance. It's like saying, if the baby has a heart attack after the sea section, that's not a reason not to terminate it. What do you mean if you have to give everybody a chance at life, you don't kill the baby in the womb just because you think that it's going to well, it could hurt the mother. You take it out of that environment. 00:26:29 Speaker 7: Okay, But what I'm saying is if they take the baby out and they know it's not gonna survive regardless, how they. 00:26:35 Speaker 2: Know that post twenty two weeks. 00:26:37 Speaker 1: You don't know that there's miracles that happen every day in the neonatal live in the neonatal intensive care unit. There's miracles that happen every day in. 00:26:46 Speaker 7: Niic u's And I agree, there's definitely they don't know one hundred percent for sure, but there's definitely probability through science, through biology that they know, hey, this is more. 00:26:54 Speaker 8: Likely going to happen. 00:26:55 Speaker 1: We don't do morals on probability. 00:26:59 Speaker 7: We don't saying it's morality. I'm saying probability of a baby's. 00:27:02 Speaker 1: Going to survive or doesn't matter. You don't terminate a life based on a probability of survival. 00:27:08 Speaker 2: Oh you do. Interesting? 00:27:11 Speaker 1: You guys murder people based on probability of survival. 00:27:15 Speaker 2: Interesting. 00:27:16 Speaker 1: So somebody on a ventilator should just be murdered. I mean, it's such incredible morality, which we keep someone. 00:27:21 Speaker 8: On a ventilator for the entirenent of everything else. 00:27:24 Speaker 1: Then it depends. There's two different things. There's no more and not yet. Once you reach the level of no more, human interventions can improve this person's life or bring them back to a full life. That is a separate moral decision than not yet. When a human being is that not yet, which they are in the womb, you must do everything you can to make sure they get life. When a human being is that no more, it's a completely separate moral dimension and decision to make no more and not yet are the ways to look at pro life DEAs. 00:27:49 Speaker 2: That makes sense. 00:27:50 Speaker 7: Yes, that makes sense. Well, thank you for debating with me, Thank you very much. Agree to disagree. 00:27:54 Speaker 9: I have a friend named Thomas Sheety. He is the founder of an organization called Atheist for Liberty. He is openly conservative, but he's mostly interested in atheists activism and normalizing atheism in all sex, including the conservative movement. He seems to be under the impression that a lot of concernism, including you, are more hesitant to work with atheist organizations. Is there any truth to that? 00:28:17 Speaker 2: Yes and no. 00:28:18 Speaker 1: I mean, if you're an atheist and you want to be part of the conservative movement, go ahead, but you must be an honest atheist and acknowledge that morality is definitionally subjective. Without a belief in God, you cannot be an atheist and believe an objective morality. It is an impossibility, and true atheists will acknowledge us at some point, you have an ought claim, well, things ought to be a certain way. We as Christians are we that believe in the divine We have is claims that there murder is wrong, whereas an atheist will say, well, murder ought to be wrong, because you can't have an objective definition if there is not a divine eternal power over you. So look, if an atheist wants to fight alongside of us to end abortion or to try and end the ma s occurring of our kids, that's called gender affirming care. And or if an atheist wants to march alongside of us to say no men in female sports, they're more than welcome to be able to do that. But atheist for liberty is an interesting phrase because I don't believe you can have liberty without God, because liberty is not man's idea, it is God's idea. That's just my own personal belief, and it's also the belief of everything that built this nation. But yes, I'm I know a lot of good atheists. The question, though, is how do you know they're good. It's because you're appealing to a moral authority above just the secular material realm, one that is transcendent. 00:29:33 Speaker 2: We would believe given by God. 00:29:38 Speaker 9: Well, I don't believe in objective morality. I do know there are plenty of atheists who are moral objectivist or. 00:29:43 Speaker 1: Are you an atheist? Sorry interrupt, but oh yeah, yeah, okay, cool? Please, So let me just can I ask you a question? And I don't mean I know this is your first time at the mic, so I'm just going to try to be tender. 00:29:50 Speaker 2: In doing this. 00:29:51 Speaker 1: I appreciate So you don't believe an objective of morality, right, I personally don't. Okay, was the Holocaust objectively wrong? 00:29:58 Speaker 2: Objectively no? 00:29:58 Speaker 9: Would have been better than how because most people won't want that to happen. 00:30:02 Speaker 1: So that's where that's where we are on different planets, and that's okay. I'm not trying to make fun of you. I'm trying to be graceful in the way that we're going about this. Do you think Hitler was objectively evil? 00:30:16 Speaker 2: No, because it's subjective. 00:30:18 Speaker 1: But I just hope all of you guys understand he's being an honest atheist to your credit, because as an atheist, you're not allowed to say anything is objectively right or wrong. I come from a worldview that when you butcher six million people that is objectively wrong, no matter what. And it's very important. It's a very important truth claim because when you do not have objective truth anchoring your society, then it becomes a power struggle. If you do not have truth, then power will reign. Whether you get the most amount of power then ends up having the most amount of say over society. We believe what is objectively right, true, good, and beautiful should be transcendent over society. 00:30:57 Speaker 9: Your thoughts, So, do you believe objective moralesy specifically comes from the Bible? 00:31:01 Speaker 2: Yes and no. 00:31:02 Speaker 1: It's also it's in nature, and the Bible explains nature. So objective morality can be discovered in many different cultures and societies, pointing towards what we believe is the ultimate objective truth. 00:31:12 Speaker 2: Jesus Christ C. S. 00:31:13 Speaker 1: Lewis explained this the best in his book Abolition of Man, which is that almost every religion talks about a certain way to live, a dow or a path that we should be on. And so more more simply than just the Bible, we believe in what the founders believed, which is an ethical monotheism, that there is one God, he has a general way that he wants you to live. For example, murdering is bad, kidnapping is wrong, defense of the innocent, and we should do our best to try to live alongside of that path. 00:31:45 Speaker 9: Okay, well, I think those are very interesting examples. You bring up the Founders, you bring up Hitler. But Hitler was his help proclaim Catholic, and he called Nazism and the Christian movements. 00:31:54 Speaker 2: Yeah, I would be careful saying that he was. He was not. That's okay, you. 00:31:58 Speaker 9: Call himself a Catholic, he said, he's as Ely said in nineteen twenty seven, our movement as Christian. 00:32:02 Speaker 2: They had on the. 00:32:02 Speaker 9: Belt buckles God on our side. Yet they then swear to the Almighty God. Atheists were not trusted to be in the SS. 00:32:10 Speaker 1: Even if I grant you that, despite the fact that he killed a lot of pastors and priests, and there of course you can pervert things in the name of God, no one denounces that. Just as a side note, though far more people died under the banner of atheism than Christianity in the twentieth century. Mao was an atheist, Stalin was an atheist. Paul Pott was an atheist. Believing in no God actually led to the destruction, the murder of well over one hundred million people. 00:32:35 Speaker 2: And that's fine. 00:32:35 Speaker 1: So again, if atheists want to come alongside us as conservatives and fight for what is good, that is great. But I will never acknowledge that atheists can tell me what is objectively good. They can only give me a preference. They cannot tell me what is right, and preferences eventually will lead you towards moral and societal decline. 00:32:55 Speaker 9: Okay, So I think he just listed a bunch of communists, and it's worth acknowledging the vast enjoy of atheists are not communists, just like the vast majority of Christians are not theocrats who don't support the divine right. It's also worth acknowledging that the founders who were actually inspired by Enlightenment values, not by the Bible. America's found is a second nation. We were the first quote unquote gallis constitution. 00:33:17 Speaker 1: Yeah again, I've done this so many times, so I don't know if we want to waste our time doing this. But fifty five out of fifty six of the signers of the declaration were Bible believing church attending Christians. Nine out of thirteen of the states of the time and ratification require a declaration of faith in order for you to serve in the states we were. Our birth certificate, which is the Mayflower Compact, said explicitly we are here to spread Christianity throughout the land. It was the first Great Revival that led to the American Revolution of Jonathan Words and Jonathan Mayhew and George Whitfield that preached all across the Eastern seaboard. John Adam seamlessly said, the Constitution is written solely for a moral and religious people. It's wholly inadequate for the people of any other. We were a Christian nation that was able to embrace the idea of a free society. God has mentioned four times in the Declaration of Independence. Not only that, Jesus Christ is mentioned in the Declaration Deependence where it says we appeal to the divine Judge of the Universe, which of course is a direct appeal to Jesus in the Book of Revelation. Yes, there were rationalist Enlightenment values that informed some of the founders, but it irrefutably was a Christian nation. Maryland was Catholic, Pennsylvania was Quaker. Almost every state had their own specific type of Christian preference. The idea of an atheist or not believing in any god, was an idea that was so foreign to the founders. Even Thomas Jefferson, the great deist, he revered the Bible, albeit with you know, some significant edits. However, the idea of believing in no cosmological or no axiological or no teleological or no optological being would be a concept that our founding fathers and not just find form, They would find it extraordinarily dangerous. Why because the French Revolution was happening simultaneously as the American Revolution, which was explicitly atheist. They actually recreated their own gods and had they said, we are going to appeal to what the God of reason. And this is my final contention, is that when I talked to atheists, the French rebel is a great example. They literally tried to change the Gregorian calendar to a ten day week. They went and imprisoned people of faith, they put priests in jail, all these different sorts of things, and they said, we are going to appeal to the God of reason. Well, how did that work out? It worked out with the guillotine and the slaughter of tens of thousands of people. The French Revolution was one of the greatest disasters in human recorded history. Contrast that with the American Revolution. Why did the American Revolution create the greatest nation ever to exist in the history of the world and the French Revolution resulted in a lot of blood and even the killing of their own once leader, Maximilian Robespierre. It's because we were anchored on Christian ideas. If you are not anchored on Christian ideas, then don't be surprised and all of a sudden there is no fruit to the harvest that you're trying to create. 00:35:40 Speaker 10: I'm an atheist, so I disagree with your religious claims. 00:35:43 Speaker 2: Do you believe in absolute truth? 00:35:47 Speaker 10: I'm not sure you can provide me this positive evidence that there is absolute truth. So the answer would be, I'm not sure. 00:35:52 Speaker 2: Are you absolutely not sure? 00:35:54 Speaker 10: I'm not sure if I'm absolutely not sure. See, this works if you say no, But it doesn't work if you bought them out in I don't know question right, No, But. 00:36:01 Speaker 1: Saying you're not sure, you are not even sure if you're not shirt, So at some point you're just always have to make a truth claim. 00:36:06 Speaker 10: Yet, no, you can just be not sure about everything all the way down. I don't see why you can't. And my answer would be, I think truth is instrumentalist in theory. I think it's the thing we choose pragmatically for the purposes of discussion. I think you can say, yeah, I think truth exists pragmatically. Regardless of that, I don't see how you get to God. 00:36:21 Speaker 2: Are you alive? 00:36:22 Speaker 10: Huh? 00:36:23 Speaker 2: Are you alive? 00:36:24 Speaker 10: I think I'm alive. 00:36:24 Speaker 2: Yeah, I think you're life. 00:36:26 Speaker 10: Yeah. 00:36:28 Speaker 1: Is the sun? Is the sun shining? 00:36:30 Speaker 10: I think it's shining. 00:36:31 Speaker 2: Yeah. 00:36:32 Speaker 10: From my frame of reference, it is shining. Notice Notice how none of this I mean, so, notice how you've gotten no steps closer to proving God. 00:36:41 Speaker 2: No, I'm asking questions. Man, okay, yeah, but are you sure we did it? 00:36:45 Speaker 10: Yeah, I'm sure. 00:36:46 Speaker 2: Are you sure? 00:36:47 Speaker 10: I'm sure in the practice God, I'm I'm sure in the pragmatic instrument Are you that we did it in the pragmatic instrumental as sense, Absolutely sure. I see truth as a utility. 00:36:55 Speaker 2: So there is a truth that's absolute. 00:36:57 Speaker 10: No, it's it's instrumentally you just it was absolutely No, absolutely sure in the instrumentalist sense of the word truth. This is a philosophical tradition that dates back hundreds of years instrumentalism. 00:37:07 Speaker 1: Yeah, which, of course we don't subscribe to obviously. So do you believe that murder is objectively wrong. 00:37:13 Speaker 10: Epistemologically objective or ontologically objective? 00:37:16 Speaker 2: Morally? 00:37:18 Speaker 10: See you didn't answer the question. 00:37:20 Speaker 1: But both both epistemologically and ontologically. But for the purpose of discussion from. 00:37:24 Speaker 10: Okay, so by what you mean? No, I don't think it's objective. 00:37:28 Speaker 1: Was Hitler a bad person objectively? 00:37:31 Speaker 8: No? 00:37:32 Speaker 10: If you mean by by the way, by the way, wait wait wait wait wait. 00:37:37 Speaker 1: No, but he's being honest at its core, atheists cannot. 00:37:41 Speaker 10: Say can I make the claim? 00:37:43 Speaker 2: Now? 00:37:43 Speaker 10: Notice who here is relying on feelings and knocked facts. Your argument is I feel that Hitler was objective? 00:37:49 Speaker 2: No I know? 00:37:50 Speaker 10: No, no, you feel that way? Can you provide me evidence of how you know? Can you provide me evidence that morality is objective? 00:37:55 Speaker 1: No? Of course I can, because well, first of all, morality is both reason and revelation, and it's built within to us that murder is wrong. 00:38:03 Speaker 10: Yeah, okay, where's your evidence of that? Is that a that's a claim, not evidence. That's a claim. 00:38:08 Speaker 1: Okay, we could, we could spend multiple hours, but in the Western tradition. 00:38:12 Speaker 10: So you notice how you're saying by tradition, by by on the standards. But I just want all claims of non truth value hold on. 00:38:18 Speaker 2: Yes they are. 00:38:18 Speaker 1: We believe that truth was revealed to us. 00:38:21 Speaker 10: We believe claim. 00:38:22 Speaker 1: But by God, hold on, but let me let me we can get there. You can keep on interrupting us. Okay, but let me prove to you how silly your viewpoint is and how self evidently wrong? Is it objectively wrong to kids? 00:38:35 Speaker 10: When you say objective? What I mean by objective? Once again? Once again? Can I you and I just notice how you still haven't given me dispositive evidence and reality's objective. You're merely saying my answer is I feel that way. I feel that way. 00:39:01 Speaker 2: No, it's objective. 00:39:02 Speaker 1: It's objectively wrong to the laws of nature of nature, the self evident nature of existence. 00:39:08 Speaker 10: Where's your proof that itself? Show me the logical proof that it'sself evidence? 00:39:11 Speaker 1: Okay, it's it's in your reason that God gave you in the consciousness. 00:39:14 Speaker 10: To prove that God gave it to me. 00:39:16 Speaker 1: Okay, but again, your existence is proof of that. You're again we can get back down to the first principles of this. 00:39:23 Speaker 10: But again but you don't want to because you know it doesn't look good. No, it looks actually really good because it's built within evidence, built within. 00:39:31 Speaker 2: Again, interrupting does not make you right. 00:39:33 Speaker 10: So you keep repeating your point. 00:39:35 Speaker 1: No I don't, So let me ask you a question in closing. Since you can't objectively say that Hitler was bad or that child is wrong, So how did the universe come into an existence? I don't know, okay, but science says that it was a big bang or a beginning point, right, okay, So using logic, which you believe. 00:39:52 Speaker 10: This is the colomn cosmological home on. 00:39:54 Speaker 1: Again, you keep interrupting using using logic, If space, time, and matter, okay, at a starting point, then logically shouldn't something outside of space, time, and matter have started those things? 00:40:05 Speaker 10: How do you know that cause is personal? How do you know that cause is worth praying to anything? 00:40:10 Speaker 2: That's not the question? 00:40:10 Speaker 10: Wait, okay, sure there is a cause? Oh that causes God? Because it's outside of space. You believe in different things about God. You think that God is personal. 00:40:19 Speaker 2: That's not what we're debating. 00:40:20 Speaker 10: We're arguing about God religion. 00:40:24 Speaker 2: Hold on, no, no, we're not debating. We're debating whether or not there's a God or not. 00:40:27 Speaker 10: No, the Christian God. I said religion that you're a religious person. You said, Christian in nature, you follow religious tradition. 00:40:32 Speaker 2: Calm down, you said you're an atheist. 00:40:33 Speaker 10: We know God, God historically a quitness, even defines it this way, is a personal God. You still haven't gotten to me to prove that it's personal. I'm happy to get to that. Okay, then get to it. 00:40:41 Speaker 1: Look, here's here's what I find with atheists. They don't want to worship or acknowledge God because many atheists think they are God. And you and body that really well. 00:40:50 Speaker 10: I didn't know you were a mind reader, Charlie. This is news to me. 00:40:52 Speaker 1: It's not a mind reader. I can tell by your behavior. 00:40:55 Speaker 2: I will say this. 00:40:55 Speaker 1: I hope that you give your life to Jesus Christ. 00:40:57 Speaker 2: I hope you do. 00:40:59 Speaker 10: I hope you can. I hope you can find. 00:41:01 Speaker 1: You know, what's interesting, there is evidence, there is evidence that Jesus hold on last thing, do you believe Jesus Christ was a real historical figure? 00:41:08 Speaker 3: Yes? 00:41:08 Speaker 1: Do you believe that the Gospels are historically accurate and we improve them with archaeological evidence? 00:41:13 Speaker 10: Some parts are some parts are Some parts are metaphors, some parts are allegory, some parts are literal. It depends. Some parts are attempts at history. Which book or gospel? 00:41:23 Speaker 1: Using rational analysis? Why would the disciples lie about the resurrection of Christ? 00:41:28 Speaker 10: Okay, we can talk about this people. They can be mistaken mistakenly wrong about it. 00:41:32 Speaker 1: So they would be mistakenly wrong up to the point where they get marty. 00:41:35 Speaker 10: The whole point, the whole point of being mistakingly wrong about something. 00:41:38 Speaker 2: Is you believe it's true all the way up to the point of death. 00:41:41 Speaker 10: The whole point of being mistakenly wrong about something. 00:41:43 Speaker 1: I just want to make sure I understand your position. Your position is that the twelve disciples who knew Christ best, saw him die, and then they all believe the mistaken conspiracy for the rest of their life. Yes, all of them together as a conspiracy. 00:41:55 Speaker 10: Yes, yes, there is no first tund account from the five hundred Gospels are all written by these people. People have died for crazy claims in the past that we know aren't true. These are all fast about this as not correct. 00:42:06 Speaker 2: Okay. 00:42:07 Speaker 1: One of the Gospels was written by one of his closest associates, Matthew. 00:42:10 Speaker 2: The next collector. 00:42:11 Speaker 1: Luke was a fact fighter that was hired. 00:42:13 Speaker 10: I didn't say the Gospels were written by them. I said there's no evidence from the five hundred that he appeared to there's no first hand accounts. 00:42:18 Speaker 2: Again, that's not correct. Thank you for your time. We'll get to next. 00:42:20 Speaker 10: Okay, you can, you can. 00:42:22 Speaker 2: We will pray for you. Thank you. Be respectful, guys, you can do what he wants. Oh can I start now. Nice to meet you, Charlie. I'm a big fan. I think you're right beautiful man. I admire you physically. But uh no, no homo, no homo, no homo. I did have a question. Something I don't find very interesting about you. Something I find kind repulsive is that I believe you said that the Civil Rights Act was bad and that we shouldn't have that. Okay, well, thank you. I appreciate that. I don't like you as much as Charlie though. First, So what's your name? Oh? Oh, sorry, I don't want to be like filmed and stuff too. I'm anonymous number one anonymous guy. Okay, well, hello, nice to meet you, anonymous, Thank you, thank you. Nice to meet you too. 00:43:08 Speaker 1: Yeah, I believe in part of the essence of the Civil Rights Act went went too way too far, way too wide. 00:43:13 Speaker 2: Oh, how they go too far? Well? 00:43:15 Speaker 1: For example, it created an entire civil rights leviathan that gave us affirmative. 00:43:18 Speaker 2: Action civil rights leviathan. What do you mean? Yes? 00:43:20 Speaker 1: So if you can let me finish three words in sorry. It allowed the Department of Justice to go after people that have different skin color aka white people, and prevent them from getting jobs in college admissions. 00:43:31 Speaker 2: You have a job. I'm sorry, you have a job. No, you're you're right, I do right. 00:43:35 Speaker 1: But just until Trump came around, until these Supreme Court decisions, thanks to the Civil Rights Act, if you have white skin color, it's much harder to get into a college than if someone has black skin color, much harder. You have to have higher test scores. It's a much harder pool, largely thanks to the precedent set by the Civil Rights Act. Not to mention all the trans stuff that we're seeing, We're seeing men be able to win trophies and medals from women across the country, and they use the Civil Rights Act to justify Okay. 00:44:00 Speaker 2: I think I see where you're coming from. So you think that it's harder for white people because of black people they have, they can have lower text scores. Again, and it's not what I think that's what you're saying. Okay, all right, well, well I guess well I would say too. I think perhaps you're familiar with the term equity, right, where different people have different circumstances. It's I reject. Okay, Okay, whether you rejected or not, I think it's a prescient, uh concept in this argument, because what you have to understand is that when you're, for example, you're born in like a black nambor, you're born like O block or something like a very very like is oh well, if you're if you're if you're born there, if you're born in a very poor area like that, but like very lot opportunity, very very poor schools of very low ratings with average test scores much lower. When you're in that environment, you have the whole system up against you, right. So it so when you say in that cop circumstance, when you're facing the whole I guess Leviathan of systemic racism sold you say that. Sorry, let me discrudge it when you say it's Fan two for example, lower at the standard because knowing that their circumstances were like that perhaps based on what they had was productive to them, they had the correct amount of merit to get into a school. Okay, so are you a student here? I'm guessing you oh yeah. 00:45:13 Speaker 8: Yeah. 00:45:13 Speaker 2: I'm saying are you pretty good student? 00:45:14 Speaker 3: Oh? 00:45:15 Speaker 2: Yeah, I would say a good student. I have a pretty high GP. Okay, can you give your GP to her because she's a woman of color? Please? Oh you wan to give you a? I mean what would you be willing to do that? I'm not sure. Yeah, sure you could be good? You cool with that? Yeah? 00:45:26 Speaker 1: I get what you mean. I want you tell her or like by force, so swapping. Let me tell what I'm gonna do by force, white man. Okay, I'm gonna take your g P A. I'm gonna give it to a woman of color. You're cool with that? 00:45:38 Speaker 9: Uh? 00:45:38 Speaker 2: I mean yeah? I can just work back up like I No, there's no working back up. I can pull myself up on my bootstown. No, there's no working back up. I mean, you can't work back that low point of conservatism. 00:45:48 Speaker 1: I'm gonna I'm gonna keep on taking it from you because that's equity, and you're cool with that. 00:45:51 Speaker 2: What does that? That's just equity in practice isn't taken. Equity is giving applying the equal standard. 00:45:56 Speaker 1: If you give, how do you get you must take? And then you get wait, what do you mean that which is given must first be taken? 00:46:01 Speaker 2: Well, what's being taken? 00:46:03 Speaker 1: When this case grades from you to grades to her. 00:46:06 Speaker 2: That no one's taking my grades? Though, that's not what that's not what a firm of it's hold on someone takes your grades. Hold on a second. 00:46:11 Speaker 1: If you only have so many you only have so many positions at University of South Florida to come in, right, there's there's a there's a there's a set number. Let's say it's twenty thousand people, okay, And we're gonna say we're gonna lower the test standards so that somebody that's a woman of color can come in, and therefore it's harder for you. So it's a higher bar for you, lower bar for them. Definitionally, that's a redistribution of test scores for somebody else, just by the definition. 00:46:35 Speaker 2: And you're okay with that? Uh, well, I guess I guess I would ask then if we were to do what you're doing, I guess that's what's happening Onundre Trump right, Well, no, it's actually been happen the last forty years. Okay, actually, yeah, whatever. Okay, So when you say that, if you do that, then well black of people aren't again in the school, and then they won't be able to uplift themselves. They won't be to have prosperous families, they won't be able to you know, equalize the economic status because you need to give them a little jump starck. You know you have a car, right, how is that? How is that? 00:46:59 Speaker 8: Well? 00:46:59 Speaker 2: Now yeah, no, no, no, no, no, it's good, but no, how is that worth? 00:47:03 Speaker 1: The last forty years we've had robuster firm in action. Oh, we've got hiring practices. Has it made Black America more successful? 00:47:08 Speaker 2: I can answer that easily. It's because it Oh sorry, it's because sorry what am I? What am I going forward? I don't know. You're a funny guy. So what happened is even after the civil rights side, you're under you know what I believe I mean the term is massive resistance. It was a movement in UH after the Bridasus wth education in Virginia were essentially the legislature which was still white supremacist, which is still extremely racist. They decided that. No, we're gonna do everything that feasibly possible within our means to stop black people from going to white schools. You even see this in uh was I believe it's a little rock nine right. Even after it was legalized at the state level, white supremacist mobs still mobilized to prevent it. So even if the facto it's God did it still exists. 00:47:54 Speaker 1: Let me ask you a very simple question. Yeah from you keep on throwing around, got you? What is racism? 00:48:00 Speaker 2: Is racism? That's a very complicated question. But no, it's not. I mean, there's a simple answer, and then there's the highly theoretical answer. 00:48:08 Speaker 8: Me simple. 00:48:09 Speaker 2: The simple answer, well, essentially be because because we have like different skin colors, that he's treated a different way than me, he has like a different bringing to me. No, no, no, but what is different? Oh, it's discrimination based on the colors, based on the car, the skin. You got it, thank you. So isn't it racist? 00:48:26 Speaker 1: Then to then penalize white people to come into college or to get jobs based on the color of their skin, wouldn't that be racist? So you're arguing for a very racist policy, which is that we should actively discriminate against people based on the color of their skin, which is affirmative action and DEI in practice. 00:48:42 Speaker 2: I just don't. I just disagree with the premise that you can do like anti white racism because uh because wait, can you be racist against white people? No? Bro, I'm a cracker. 00:48:53 Speaker 8: Bro? 00:48:53 Speaker 2: What now you can't be racist? 00:48:55 Speaker 8: Brother? 00:48:55 Speaker 6: There's subny crackers here right, there's their bright there's a clip. Well what do you get that you could do political violence to be bro? Like, why you're saying that to me? You're making me scared? 00:49:15 Speaker 8: Uh? 00:49:15 Speaker 2: Ohky, So let me tell you what we believe. 00:49:16 Speaker 1: Because you tell us what you believe, your worldview is indistinguishable from the KKK that you want. That you want to organize the world based on skin color. 00:49:25 Speaker 2: We want to organize the world based. 00:49:27 Speaker 1: On merit and character, based on how hard you work, what you bring to the table. I believe it's destructive and wrong to say that people are gonna be organized or have their future set based on the color of their skin. I think it's tribalistic. I think it is divisive, and I think it hurts the excellence of a country. You asked a question, well, how are we gonna help other communities? You know how you help other communities stop pandering to them and start treating them like individuals made in the image of God, not tribes to be organized for political purposes. 00:49:58 Speaker 2: Okay, So do you think like Trump is a now not as president, now that racism is gone now because Jump is back, we're no longer pandering, right, do you think that the conditions of a of black people of like do you think, oh, block, is it gonna become like how much a nice place? Do you think that? Do you think that these very downturned sort of a black neighborhoods that have been sort of left beyond do you think they're gonna become revitalized now? Is that what you think is gonna happen? Yeah, they'll do better, for sure. You think they do better now we've stopped helping them, they could do better. 00:50:26 Speaker 9: Well. 00:50:26 Speaker 2: See, that's an interesting thing because it seems like contre dictory that may just do basic logic. 00:50:30 Speaker 1: Well, Actually, Black Americans under Donald Trump in the first term saw the greatest economic renaissance that they saw since the nineteen fifties. Do you want to think Obama race is lowest unemployment, revitalization, amazing investment in their communities, opportunity zones. 00:50:44 Speaker 2: I mean that's when we had the firm of action and they went to be bad. 00:50:47 Speaker 1: Well again, we actually get rid of firm of action now now, but I'm talking about before. Those are unrelated things though, just you know. 00:50:53 Speaker 2: You think that they don't see them. I'm related to me. Well, firm action is addressing racism. Theyve action is looking so I'm sorry, I'm know you are. That's okay, I'm sorry. 00:51:02 Speaker 1: Affirmative action is largely federal government hiring practices and the adjacent institutions. I think that all communities will do even better when we stop living under the soft bigotry of low expectations. Inherent in your argument is that we have to pander to certain communities based on the call of their skin because they can't do as well as white people. 00:51:21 Speaker 2: I reject the premise. 00:51:23 Speaker 1: I think that we should try to say I don't care about the call your skin, I care about what you bring to the table, and stop pandering the people based on special criteria points and acceptance the college saying that we're going to make it easier for one group and harder for another group. 00:51:35 Speaker 2: I don't think it's that, but it's understanding. Okay, but do you think that based on that. 00:51:41 Speaker 1: Do you think that we should have black only dormitories in America? No? 00:51:44 Speaker 2: Why would I want that? 00:51:45 Speaker 1: Okay, well, there's hundreds of schools that have those actually, and. 00:51:48 Speaker 2: Black only, like they're not white people are not allowed. 00:51:50 Speaker 1: You, white people are not allowed to white where not allowedrect we have black only graduation ceremonies across the country. 00:51:56 Speaker 2: Well, those are from a well I believe those are most likely like eight pc us right, like. 00:52:01 Speaker 1: The University of Michigan has, Harvard has one. So we're agreeing that that is wrong. That is the first's extension of hype hyper race obsession. So you have to you could you could choose one or the other. You can be race obsessed or merit obsessed. We as conservatives, decide to be merit obsessed to build a country base on how hard you work and what you're able to deliver. 00:52:21 Speaker 2: Okay, Well the uh so wait here, just I wasn't final point? Yeah, final point? I sure, Okay, sure, this thing's a little close. Oh I'm sorry, I don't mean to offend your wonderful set up here. Uh yeah, so I guess I'll just restate my point that, Uh, I don't believe you mentioned like all black dormitories, right, Uh, I mean, I I don't really comment on that. I mean, I don't know if that's real. To me, that sounds fake. But I'll give you the benefit of doubt here. It's very real, okay, But I just think it's very irrelevant, kind of like aesthetic focus. Think it doesn't really affect the material conditions of like black if. 00:52:56 Speaker 1: You if you heard there were white only dormitories, there'd be marching in the streets. 00:52:58 Speaker 7: Right. 00:52:59 Speaker 2: Oh well, because because okay, I can I get the difference. The difference is like, for example, I'll go back to segregation, the all white dormitory was nicest and all black one was. So if that's the if that's if that was brought back, Okay, if we were doing all white dormitory and I'm. 00:53:12 Speaker 1: Not recommending I think actually segregation is wrong and evil, and we're heading until Donald Trump. 00:53:17 Speaker 2: We were heading in that direction until But like, okay, I'll go back because I did, like I let slip by. But you mentioned that like in the early years of the dollch On presidency, right, that the conditions, the employment and stuff were going up for black people. What I would say is the economy works up slow works at like a time dilation for the policies initially enacted so well, I would I would probably assume, based on what you said to me, is that it was the Albama era policies that that actually led to that, not the Trump policies, because stuff like tax cuts doesn't really help. 00:53:45 Speaker 1: In a year from now, we're gonna have the greatest economy ever. They're gonna say. 00:53:48 Speaker 2: It's all bid them, it's all bid them. Well, I mean, if we I don't think that's gonna happen at person. I think the colomy is going this with what all Elon Musk is doing. But if that, if that was to happen, I mean, I guess my whole world view. But I'm pretty sorry about what about Elon? What Elon's doing? Bothers? You do you do you not want to see the government efficient? The government is efficient. He's just firing everybody. Looks, look he did the toilet bro y'all see what happened towilet brats races us. Now it is the Nazi haven. It went from like a pretty pretty accepting place to like what like we're like the average blue check mark, I saying Hail Hilther Like Elon Musk himself has replied to like, well, he did the Nazi salute, Like we're not gonna forget about that, are we? 00:54:24 Speaker 7: No? 00:54:25 Speaker 2: He did? Yeah, y'all, y'all see that clip. Bro y'all see when he did that? All right? 00:54:29 Speaker 8: Oh? 00:54:30 Speaker 2: Okay, thank And by the way, I just want to thank you for something. You're welcome. Well, I want to thank you. Do I get do I get a part of like the TikTok revenue gonna get from this? 00:54:36 Speaker 1: I want I want to thank you. I want to thank you for something. Oh yeah, you you are a perfect reminder why we want to November. So thank you for that. 00:54:44 Speaker 2: I really appreciate it. Thank you. 00:54:45 Speaker 1: So you would say I'm a misinformation machine. That's fine, Yeah, fine, you're a teacher. 00:54:49 Speaker 2: Yes. What is a woman? What is a woman? 00:54:54 Speaker 5: Oh? 00:54:54 Speaker 2: Buddy? 00:54:55 Speaker 8: All right? 00:54:56 Speaker 11: So we define gender as a set of preferences that you have, excuse me, gender. Gender is a set of preference we have. Woh. Woman is a social construct that we've agreed upon. Typically, we imagine womanhood as makeup or whatever it is. There is a difference between the word woman and being a biological female. Woman is a social construct that we use. Listen for a second. I'm telling you what it means. Woman is a social construct. We agree on these set of preferences. If I tell you that I'm a man, is because I want you to know that I like these set of preferences. If I tell you I'm a woman, is because I want you to know that I agree with these set of preferences. Can men give birth? Can men? 00:55:52 Speaker 2: Or can males? 00:55:53 Speaker 11: Because males can't these Listen for a second. If you listen, it's your bio professors, you'd understand there's difference between biology and what we think. 00:56:04 Speaker 1: So I want to thank you for proving a great point. Well, you are why we should eliminate the Department of Education. 00:56:09 Speaker 2: Thank you love it. 00:56:10 Speaker 12: I love you are here making a Trumps and mind the pro Trump speech for you. 00:56:16 Speaker 2: This has nothing to do with genders. Well, it has a lot of children. I'll talk about it here. Tell me how much you love you. Have a great day, God bless you. I'll pray for you. 00:56:25 Speaker 13: Oh my goodness, that will help a lot. 00:56:27 Speaker 9: Prayer. 00:56:28 Speaker 2: Prayer is a powerful thing, Yes it is. 00:56:30 Speaker 10: It has done horrendous things to this plant. 00:56:32 Speaker 2: Prayer has done horrendous things, and this. 00:56:34 Speaker 12: Plant has through Christianity and through a lot of other religions, marrow minded religions have caused a lot of pain and suffering. 00:56:42 Speaker 1: On this plend More people have died over the last one hundred years under the guise of Marxism and statism than any other ideology, not even close. 00:56:50 Speaker 6: More people. 00:56:51 Speaker 1: One hundred million people died under communism in the last hundred years. One hundred million, Yeah, sixty and moles China thirty in Stalin's Russia to pol Pot's Cambodia, at least two hundred thousand in Cuba. 00:57:04 Speaker 2: I can keep doing. 00:57:04 Speaker 12: I'm not teaching communism here. 00:57:06 Speaker 1: No, but I'm saying nothing about children. 00:57:10 Speaker 13: You're telling me how much you support Trump and how much I'll. 00:57:13 Speaker 2: Talk about whatever you want to talk about. 00:57:15 Speaker 13: It's your conversation. 00:57:16 Speaker 2: What do you believe? 00:57:19 Speaker 12: I believe that there's a remedy for situations and not a political battle. I believe that if we work together and open our minds instead of militarizing ourselves, we could come up with a solution. 00:57:31 Speaker 2: Isn't talking how we come to solutions, Sure. 00:57:33 Speaker 12: But getting mad and making political stances on who you love and what the president's doing is so great and what the PM is doing. 00:57:39 Speaker 13: So that is not a conversation, it's a statement. 00:57:42 Speaker 1: We'll have a conversation. 00:57:45 Speaker 13: Maybe we could have a conversation in the history building sometimes about what. Maybe we could have a conversation in the history. 00:57:50 Speaker 2: Building sometimes, Yes, history conversation. 00:57:52 Speaker 1: History will tell us that when government grows too big, people. 00:57:56 Speaker 2: Suffer and die. 00:57:57 Speaker 1: Yes, that's what the history building should tell you. History will also tell us we live in the greatest country ever to exist. History will also tell you that Western civilization is the greatest miracle that humans ever got. 00:58:10 Speaker 2: History will tell you that. Any history will tell you that Western history will tell you that. Tell me any history is a fault. I have to be in class. So I would really love to continue. God, bless you, thank you. Do you say it's a lie? It was just kind of talks. Yeah, similar, similar, it's similar. Similar. 00:58:31 Speaker 1: So America is the greatest country ever to exist, not even close. What what country would you say is the greatest? Makes the country great, most productive, most accepting, most generous, most benevolence. Yes, we take in half the world's immigrants every single year. How is this not accepted? 00:58:54 Speaker 2: What does that have to do about not being accepted? 00:58:58 Speaker 1: My name is Charlie Kirk, and I love America because I love talking with people I disagree with the country. Start an organization that's now in a thousand plus campuses to save the greatest culture and country ever to exist. 00:59:10 Speaker 5: Hires vets and Higher's vets and. 00:59:14 Speaker 1: And I've had thousands of hours of conversation about these ideas. 00:59:19 Speaker 8: The cameras, is it necessary? 00:59:22 Speaker 1: Well, considering I've been assaulted, followed, stocked, and had things thrown at me, the greatest protection I have is cameras. It's a public space, all. 00:59:39 Speaker 2: Right, once one second? 00:59:40 Speaker 1: One you have this seens it's all good. But what country would you say is greater than this one? It's fine, I just said, I mean we taken. 00:59:50 Speaker 8: Hat your your definition of three. 00:59:54 Speaker 2: I mean we are the you say that the. 00:59:56 Speaker 4: United States of America has always done the has always made the greatest decision because it's perfect. 01:00:03 Speaker 7: Right. 01:00:03 Speaker 1: I never said America was a perfect country every nor have we. We've made a lot of mistakes. 01:00:08 Speaker 13: Anything great? 01:00:09 Speaker 1: No, no, no, no, no, That's not what I've said. Extra because from an objective analysis, pective correct of world history. Hello, how are you? We are the most creative, the most accepting, the most benevolent, the most generous, most forward thinking and productive country ever to exist. We are a country that sent thirty seven thousand of our own citizens to die and the Korean peninsula so South Korea could exist, and we asked for nothing in return. No country's ever done anything close to that. We sent them milkication reading history. 01:00:46 Speaker 2: What did I do? How is that not true? What I just said? No? But what am I saying? That's untrue? 01:00:54 Speaker 1: Americans gave away five hundred billion dollars to charity last year voluntarily. We've taken half of the world's immigrants half work. 01:01:04 Speaker 2: You know that only five percent of the money that you've put into a non promitary charity. 01:01:09 Speaker 8: Even has to be you. 01:01:12 Speaker 2: So most. 01:01:15 Speaker 1: Most charities and most foundations will use ninety plus percent of the net assets they get. 01:01:20 Speaker 2: Every single year. What now, you can look at the you can look at the IRS website. 01:01:26 Speaker 1: I understand what I'm saying might bother you, But we're also the most accepting, least racist, most diverse, multiracial country in the world by far. We've been okay, How look at the United accepted. We've taken half the world's immigrants every single year, so. 01:01:44 Speaker 8: Other countries to. 01:01:47 Speaker 10: Poverty. 01:01:47 Speaker 2: Most America is not living in poverty. Yes, really educated. 01:01:51 Speaker 1: We're the richest country in the world by far. We have an American middle class is a uniquely American concept. 01:01:58 Speaker 13: You ever walk down the streets, Excuse me, I grew up in a gang gang infested neighborhood. So you want to talk to poor people, I'm talking, and we're talking to you from a perspective. 01:02:09 Speaker 1: You know that America is poor actually and the richest one percent in the world a remarkable amount. 01:02:16 Speaker 2: Of people in the world. 01:02:19 Speaker 13: Persons. 01:02:20 Speaker 1: Know what I'm saying is that a very poor person in America is relatively extraordinarily rich by world standards. 01:02:26 Speaker 2: Yes, hello you. I don't want to tell you. 01:02:32 Speaker 8: How to speak. 01:02:34 Speaker 1: I go around universities and have challenging conversations and because that's what is so important to our country is to find our disagreements respectfully, because when people stop. 01:02:46 Speaker 2: Talking, that's when violence happens. You could see that happen all across the world. 01:02:51 Speaker 13: So I don't and I'm not really interested in being a field. So that's I understand americastries. 01:02:58 Speaker 2: Where are you from Australia? 01:03:00 Speaker 5: It okay, and I just again, don't send in Tennessee. I've never seen someone dubiously. 01:03:07 Speaker 1: Yes, Well, it's a growing trend because people like me are facing violence assault the left. Yes, the campus Antifa. I've been stormed out of restaurants. I've been assaulted publicly, multiple death threats. Well, the campus left has been incited by Democratic leadership and trained to go after people like me. 01:03:33 Speaker 13: Okay, so at that part of this asign. 01:03:35 Speaker 8: What might have cheated from that year? 01:03:37 Speaker 1: Well, because I love talking to people I disagree with, Because in America we have a tradition for public discourse and dialogue. Going back into the Lincoln Douglas debates, going back to Teddy Roosevelt screaming at political opponents, going back to how the US Congress should exist. 01:03:54 Speaker 13: Okay, so what's you golling on this to. 01:03:59 Speaker 2: I'm freezing, We're we're in the shade. Is this is where that we have to be? My goal is to do you have to be them well, because you have to have permits and stuff to do this. Yeah, this is it. 01:04:10 Speaker 1: Despite the First Amendment, they relegate me to a certain area. But so, but also number two, there's more people that agree with me than some people would actually believe, and they come out of the woodwork when I. 01:04:21 Speaker 2: Do stuff like this. And finally we record all of. 01:04:23 Speaker 1: It so that we put on the internet so people can see. These ideas collide when people stop talking, and that's when you get violence. That's when civil war happens because you start to think the other side is so evil and they lose their humanity. Marriages break apart when you stop talking, Churches fall apart, businesses, companies, friendships, relationships. 01:04:41 Speaker 2: Yes, sure, so I have to go yes from the university. 01:04:45 Speaker 13: Yeah, there's just one thing that I've seen as your big city can as you bring in the phone, is it you really probably have some really good ones to say. And that's fine. I'm trying and least it on the statinism bea So I'm gonna go apartment step. 01:04:56 Speaker 8: And I'm wait from some pace. 01:04:58 Speaker 2: But you're really like sleeping towar in a way into I don't know what that word means. 01:05:03 Speaker 13: Rhetoric. 01:05:04 Speaker 2: Oh, rhetoric. I didn't hear it. 01:05:05 Speaker 13: Okay, it makes you you kind of start to tip off things and the points that you're trying to make because I'm sure you know your arguments really well. But from the people I watched, standing, the kind of the party is. 01:05:15 Speaker 4: To fix your tourism. 01:05:16 Speaker 2: Do you think they hear that stuff commonly thought? 01:05:18 Speaker 13: Well, I don't know what you present, that's all I think you point. Let sure, and it's not a pretty sis. Sure you're comfortable with the session that you want. I think you're approached on your hearing. 01:05:31 Speaker 1: Yeah, but at least ten or twelve things I told that, I said that word factual. 01:05:35 Speaker 13: That's your point that you've told. 01:05:36 Speaker 1: Yes, telling is not a conversation, but they have They can walk away at any time. 01:05:40 Speaker 2: Conversation takes two people. 01:05:42 Speaker 13: He told me there's something you want you two. 01:05:43 Speaker 2: Yes, But they didn't hear it some of it. 01:05:45 Speaker 1: For example, I said ninety plus percent of border patrol agents support building the wall. 01:05:49 Speaker 2: They immediately dismissed it. They never heard that before. So I'm saying things that are not commonly discussed at a university. 01:05:54 Speaker 1: And all I'm saying is that way you say sometimes Okay, I appreciate that, Thank you, I appreciate it. 01:06:00 Speaker 8: Thank you. 01:06:02 Speaker 14: I'm technically a Democrat, but I have very conservative views because I'm faith based all the way. So I have a question which is also kind of a disagreement, but I want to build it up. Okay, So, of course you just said Jesus is the most important thing for everyone out here, and so can you please explain to everyone out here what Jesus stood for, and especially the qualities of love, how to love your neighbor even if they don't agree with you. 01:06:31 Speaker 2: So what is your name? Again? To Lisa, that's a beautiful question. 01:06:34 Speaker 1: I'm glad you came up to ask it, But I want to also just add something, because you're right, Jesus fully embodied to thinks simultaneously that showed his divine and his godly nature, because not that Jesus said good things. Jesus is Lord, Christ is King, and Jesus is God on top of just being a guy with a lot of good ideas. So John eight, if I'm drawing from memory correctly, best embodies both Christ's mercy and love, but also his commitment to truth. And sometimes in the modern Gospel, we overemphasize the grace and we underemphasize the truth, and so we are far too willing to say, hey, Jesus loves everybody, but we don't get to the second part of the conversation. It says, Jesus doesn't want you to live in sin. 01:07:19 Speaker 2: So this is in John A. It's best embodied. 01:07:21 Speaker 7: Right. 01:07:22 Speaker 1: Almost every Christian in this audience will be able to tell you the first part of this, which is a bunch of Sadducees and Pharisees are sitting around, standing around with rocks, and they're about to stone the prostitute woman, and Jesus comes up and says, let the first among you without sin cast the first stone, and everyone starts dropping the rocks. But what comes next shows that Christ is not just grace focused, he's simultaneously truth focused. He goes up to the woman who had a career in selling herself for sex and said, sin no more. Now, imagine today how much trouble you would get in if you would go up to somebody and say, stop sinning. You are being too judgmental. No, no, you're actually being christ Like. So Jesus stood, he was one hundred percent grace and truth. And that tension is very hard in a modern world because we want to overemphasize grace, when in reality Christ loves us too much to have us continue to live in sin. He wants us to try to elevate our actions to glorify God and all that we do. 01:08:21 Speaker 4: I agree one hundred percent. 01:08:23 Speaker 14: And so to go on my question, I really want to talk about DEI and so with our Christian I will agree with you a lot of I read the Bible for myself, so I knew what that scripture said. But my question is how can Christian teachings on love, equity, and justice in form and shape discussions on diversity, equity, and inclusion in today's society. And so to also, Jesus hung out with sinners. 01:08:47 Speaker 5: He did not judge. He told the truth. 01:08:49 Speaker 14: And so I think that a lot of people in society today when we talk about political views that our opposition, we judge them because we think, oh, because you voted for Trump, you agree on everything, when that's not the case, right, And I want you to talk about that. 01:09:04 Speaker 2: Are you good? 01:09:05 Speaker 1: So, and then I'll connect with the DEI and I'm going to make a case and I don't know if it will be persuasive to you why I think DEI is unbiblical. And I'm gonna try to make that case. Okay, But first let me talk about let me comment on your astute point, which is that Christ wants us to be around people that are not like us. This is why I go to college campuses. But more and more I go to college campuses, I'm getting a lot of big crowds. So it's kind of unusually. I used to go here and you know, get heckled and have very small crowds. But let me demonstrate this in an unusual way. Almost every person that's audience would say Christ wants us to be salt and light. Now what are the two characteristics of salt and light? They change the environments that they come in contact with. They do not affirm, they do not conform, They change for the better. It's very important everybody, We as Christians are called to change the environment that we come in touch with. 01:09:53 Speaker 2: How's it going. So I'm a born gain believer in Jesus, and. 01:10:01 Speaker 15: But I want to hear your thoughts, Charlie, because sometimes I really struggle to align myself with the conservative side of the issues in our country. And multiple experiences in my life, whether it be it was just conversation that somebody picked up or whatever how I look, whatever it may be, assumptions my political views or where I'm leaning have blocked and gotten in front of what I really believe in, which is advancing the Gospel. And so my issue sometimes is that I want to be patriotic, I want to vote for and be public about that which I think is best for my country, but I don't want it to get in front of my main goal, what I feel like I've been placed here on this earth for, which is advancing the Gospel to all people, not just conservatives, not just people who are comfortable walking in the church, but the far left of the left who are in their season of life for reasons I don't know, and I don't want what I believe to be for this country to get in the way of what's gonna ultimately grow the Kingdom of God. 01:11:05 Speaker 2: It's a great question. What's your name? 01:11:06 Speaker 11: Matt? 01:11:07 Speaker 2: Matt? Thank you. 01:11:08 Speaker 1: Let's repeat what you said, because it's correct. The most important thing in the world is to know Christ then make him known. The second most important thing, though, is to make sure you can do the first thing. That's where I come in. You're focusing your life the number one. I'm focusing a majority of my life of number two. What I mean by that during COVID. They called the church non essential. Yet they left strip clubs, open, marijuana dispensaries, home depot and lows. But they said the Bride of Christ non essential. They always say separation church and state. Why is it then that the state could come in and shut down the church? You see, what we see is that when we stop caring about politics, is the government's so big it starts persecuting our religious liberty and our freedom. And it's not a contradiction. In fact, if you look at the conservative agenda, it is it is far. It's a far greater fit with a biblical worldview than anything on the left. And I'm sure you agree with that. 01:11:58 Speaker 5: Right. 01:11:59 Speaker 1: God created man and woman. When does life begin? Strong borders? It says in the scriptures Jeremiah twenty nine to seven. Demand the welfare of the nation that you are in, because your welfare is tied to your nation's welfare. So we should care about our nation. In fact, Daniel fastened and prayed for his country Esther Mordecai Niemaiyah Jeremiah Joseph. In fact, we are called to be counselors to the king. We're called to be the moral conscious of a nation. And so if we want to know Christ and make him known, we must have one ingredient of free society. It is hard to know Christ than make him known in countries where the Gospel is not ought to be told on the side of the street, like China or North Korea. And that's not an exaggeration. When Christians fail to care about politics, politics will start caring about Christian And we must understand that we are the recipients and the inheritors of a country that was founded by Christians. So the Gospel can spread. And so I don't think it's a contradiction at all. I don't think that it's what's best for the country. I think is actually best for the kingdom. And let's pretend America. Let's say America collapses. Do you know that well over ninety percent of all international mission funding comes from. 01:13:06 Speaker 2: The United States. 01:13:07 Speaker 1: Yeah, I can believe it that most missionaries come from five percent of the world's population. Here we are populating the earth in Africa and South America with people who love the Lord, that come with money, that come with resources, that come with clean water equipment. If America were to fall, the gospel would not spread as far in fact, the world is becoming more Christian because of America's wealth, our generosity, and our track record to say that we're going to stand for our fellow men and love our neighbor as ourselves. So I don't see any contradiction. I just see a difference in the same mission. Your mission is first and foremost to win people of Christ. I try to do that every day. But my mission is to make sure that you can do that without being arrest that are thrown in a gulag. 01:13:46 Speaker 2: Thank you, God, bless you. 01:13:48 Speaker 16: And I just wanted to ask you, because I'm a big Catholic, I wanted to ask you how important do you think religion is in this in this day and age? 01:13:53 Speaker 2: Very important? 01:13:54 Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean as America becomes more secular, and as the country becomes less godly, we become less free, more miserable, more depressed, more suicidal, more anxious, et cetera. 01:14:03 Speaker 2: Yeah. 01:14:04 Speaker 16: So is this so I see that you that you really do try to push religion. Are you're a Christian? 01:14:10 Speaker 7: Yeah? 01:14:10 Speaker 2: I am a Christian. When did you grow up that way? Yes? Did you just recently? 01:14:15 Speaker 5: No? 01:14:15 Speaker 1: I mean I grew up in a passive Christian home, gave my life to the Lord when I was in fifth grade. 01:14:19 Speaker 5: Yeah, yeah, Hi, I'm wondering what your intentions are. So I am new to you and this, and I was just intrigued. 01:14:27 Speaker 1: Sure, hear from different ideas and see where we agree and disagree. 01:14:31 Speaker 5: So yeah, what's like your purpose though? Like communication? Yes, but like what are what ideas are you trying to bring? Or like help people. 01:14:39 Speaker 1: Understand conservative ones traditional American ones? 01:14:43 Speaker 5: Okay, like traditional conservatism or like modern conservative right wing because they like switched. 01:14:48 Speaker 1: I don't like labels, so you can ask me about a topic. 01:14:50 Speaker 5: Cool, So yeah, okay, I. 01:14:53 Speaker 1: Think there's only two sexes. No, gender's infinite personalities. Life begins at conception. We should deport all the illegals, right. The m RNA gen altering shot called the vaccine killed a lot of people and it's currently poisoning a lot of people. Yeah, so these are just some of my opinions. 01:15:07 Speaker 5: So you think it'll like make the country better? 01:15:10 Speaker 8: Like what are you? 01:15:11 Speaker 2: Yeah? 01:15:11 Speaker 1: I mean I hope that number the number one. I want to support our amazing turning point USA chapter here where they feel out numbered and isolated. Number two we're promoting our event tonight. So I hope you guys show up. Where's our event. It's like in the Montazuma Hall or something. Yeah, that's great, Monta Zooma Hall, Montazuoma whatever. And number three is I want to see where I might be wrong, strengthen my arguments, and anybody can say anything to me. I think that free speech is the last best hope we have in Western society. 01:15:35 Speaker 5: Nice. Okay, Then I have a question about like women's rights in America. I just want to hear what you think, like where you think we're at, how you think we could better? Yeah? 01:15:46 Speaker 2: Can you just so I know where you're coming from. Can you tell me what is a woman? 01:15:51 Speaker 5: Oh, that's a great question. I would classify a woman as somebody with a womb and or a vagina. Sometimes people are born with either one or the other. 01:16:03 Speaker 1: Good we agree, yes, So as far as women's rights, I don't separate rights based on sex. So you have to tell me what you mean based on that. 01:16:14 Speaker 5: Okay, Oh that's interesting. So do you believe that there's a difference right now in like people's rights and no. 01:16:21 Speaker 1: No, I mean there's male female differences, but there are no male rights. Or can you give me an. 01:16:25 Speaker 5: Example Okay, like patriarchy, That's what I'm getting at. Do you believe that we live in a patriarchy and it negatively affects women? 01:16:31 Speaker 4: No? 01:16:32 Speaker 9: No? 01:16:33 Speaker 1: Yeah, So, for example, men are more likely to commit suicide, yeah, more likely to die at work, more likely to declare bankruptcy. Women are far less likely to be in credit card debt, far more likely to graduate from college, far more likely to get a high paying job. 01:16:47 Speaker 5: Do you think that that's a really good point. Do you think that the suicide rates, or the depression rates, and the bankruptcy rates that you just mentioned regarding men have to do with the fact that men are pushed to be less open about their emotions. There they're less available to being able to communicate how they feel with others. They're taught to be more violent and be more physically harmful to themselves and others. And do you think that pushes them towards suicide, depression, and bankruptcy. 01:17:17 Speaker 1: I think it's the opposite. I think that we're teaching men to be metrosexual versions of their former selves. 01:17:22 Speaker 5: What does metrosexual mean to you? 01:17:24 Speaker 1: Indecipherable between a man and woman. 01:17:26 Speaker 5: So it's a man and women to you. What's the difference between them. 01:17:29 Speaker 1: Well, a man is in you're looking at a man, and I think I'm looking at a woman if I'm not. 01:17:33 Speaker 5: Mistaken nice Yeah, yeah, that's funny. 01:17:35 Speaker 1: Yeah, there's yeah, thank you, there's there's characteristics, archetypes. But we have we have differences. There are significant male female differences. I think what, well, men tend to be more assertive, women tend to be more agreeable innately or taught innately, And I wouldn't sayinly based on what science Well, just for example, if we look at artificial intelligence, scanned over ten thousand brains using a spec scan and was able to determine male female differences ninety five percent of the time of different brain functions based on basic ganlia, amigdal age cerebella. 01:18:09 Speaker 5: Because interestingly enough you read twenty two, okay, fourteen to twenty two. I read a study recently that before the age of ten, brains are Neuroscientists are unable to be able to tell the difference in gender based on the brain. But at a certain point the social implications that children are taught start making them act differently. But it's been it's been shown that if a man or a woman were given the same. Okay, have you heard that men are they have more spatial awareness, like in their brain. 01:18:39 Speaker 2: I think that's probably true. 01:18:40 Speaker 5: Yeah, yeah, So we learned that if women are given a month of the same practices as children that men are given or allowed to do, whether whether it comes to what they're playing the media they're intaking, like what they're told and how they're told to act, that women have the same spatial awareness ability as men. So we're finding that innately the brain is the same, but because of the social constructs that we're taught on men and women and how they're supposed to act, their brain ability to activate certain parts changes. So by fourteen, the brain does seem different. 01:19:11 Speaker 2: You're raised kids. Tell me, have you ever raised kids? 01:19:15 Speaker 8: Now? 01:19:15 Speaker 5: I have six nieces and nephews. 01:19:16 Speaker 1: Though men and women, you couldn't be more wrong. If you're even around a two year old boy and two year old girl, it's not a matter of what they're taught. The girls are running too the dresses. The boys are running to the guns. You know who agrees with me. One of the leading feminists of the sixties and seventies, Gloria Steinmann, who wrote Feminist mystique. 01:19:31 Speaker 2: Yes, and I read that even she who was. 01:19:34 Speaker 1: Like a hardcore gender is taught when she raised her kids. She was like, oh my goodness, there is a fundamental, innate difference between men and women. And it's not just brain structure. It's testosterone, it's estradial, it's estrogen production, it is hormone levels, it is all And I could just prove it. If you sit down to a young with a young lady, they're far more likely to talk about micro topics, and men are more likely to talk about macro topics. 01:19:59 Speaker 5: What's the difference? 01:20:00 Speaker 2: Great question. 01:20:01 Speaker 1: So if I sat down with a young lady, she'd mean much more likely to talk about friends, relationships, and things that are very intimate to her. A young man, we more likely to talk about the weather, sports, or the stock market or politics. Yeah, and that's not taught. 01:20:13 Speaker 2: That is innate. 01:20:14 Speaker 1: That is innate into our bioprogramming. 01:20:17 Speaker 5: What is bioprogramming? 01:20:18 Speaker 2: How we were designed? 01:20:20 Speaker 5: What do you mean how we were designed? 01:20:21 Speaker 1: I mean I believe that there's a creator that designed us and that we're fearfully and wonderfully made. And you might not agree. I was just say how you were born. I would even say, just to come to common ground on that. 01:20:31 Speaker 5: Okay, So the Creator chose that men and women have separate roles and it's innate, well. 01:20:36 Speaker 1: Not just separate roles, but made differently, and out of being made differently, you get different roles. 01:20:40 Speaker 5: Right, So if science proves that the other way do you just do you rely on creator over science. 01:20:46 Speaker 1: But science has done the opposite. So for example, in a Harvard study, they put fifty women in a room alone, and they put fifty men in the room alone. H not relevant, but around twenty five right relevant? 01:20:57 Speaker 5: Okay, So no, sorry, I'm actually having so much. 01:21:00 Speaker 1: Okay, So if you really I'm fascinated you think that eight year old's brains are infinitely neuroplastic, but we'll. 01:21:07 Speaker 2: Get to the back to them. 01:21:08 Speaker 5: No, no, when they're like babies by eight years old, you're already going through school and you've had so many relationships, they're definitely affected. 01:21:14 Speaker 1: But again, if you were right, John Money would have been proven right, but we'll get that later. So which that test isn't replicated so many times, and even the Dutch, who are like the most progressive on this, have gotten away from the idea of tabila ross. So that boys and girls are are boring similarly with brain differences, but we'll agree to discrain that. But the anyway, twenty five year olds were put into a room, okay, and they said, men, what do you think about when they're alone? No surprise, sports and sex? Right, young ladies, what do you think about in the room alone? For thirty minutes, just by themselves, they replayed prior conversations that they had. For the record, no man in the history of the species has replayed conversations that we had and thought about them when we were alone in a room, Like, what conversation? 01:21:53 Speaker 9: What was? 01:21:53 Speaker 2: This person said? 01:21:54 Speaker 1: Women are far more relational micro than men, and that's just based on how our design is. 01:22:01 Speaker 5: WHOA, I think that you just lied that. All men don't think that's such a It's called a joke. 01:22:08 Speaker 1: I'm sure there's a man somewhere that recollected on a conversation. 01:22:13 Speaker 5: Well, I didn't know that in a dialect that's a debate based on science, and you're talking about a study that would you implement a joke that's based on it. 01:22:19 Speaker 1: Yes, Humor is a tool of a rhdetorician to try to get people, you know, to chuckle a little levity. 01:22:25 Speaker 2: So yeah, thank you, I appreciate it. Thank you. 01:22:28 Speaker 1: Let me ask you a question. Do you think testosterone and estrogen play into people's ability to have drive, ambition, feelings, and do you think testosterone estern are important? 01:22:38 Speaker 5: Yes? 01:22:39 Speaker 1: Okay, So then if women are lower in testosterone and higher and estrogen and men are lower in estrogen higher in testosterone, wouldn't that, independent of society's framing, play into the idea that there are natural differences between the two. 01:22:52 Speaker 5: I think that it definitely plays into the idea that they're in natural differences, and I think there are natural differences. I just think to an extent that as a society, we've decided that men because they have more testosterone, and we've known testosterone makes people more aggravated, that or what's aggravated. I'll just leave it aggressive aggressive, Yes, sure, I take aggressive. Yeah, thank you. That it makes people are men more aggressive, that we've decided that that means that men are not in control of their moral ability or their ability to to choose what they're going to do. So it becomes like men have more testosterone, but they still have the ability to choose to treat people so better or with less aggression like it's not it's like, oh, men don't have the ability to make those choices. That's almost like downplaying men's ability by saying that they just have to give into their aggression. 01:23:43 Speaker 1: I'm not contesting that the mark of a true man is one who who can control himself. Do you think that you could do you think there's a problem of trying to turn women too masculine. 01:23:53 Speaker 5: Turning women to masculine. 01:23:56 Speaker 1: What's masculine for you, Well, let's just say not agreeable, forceful, aggressive, aggressive in the best possible term, forward thinking, more macro, more visionary, less feeling based, more rational, more yearning towards reason and dialogue, and less towards compassion or the ethos And what's feminine to you the inverse of that, So more on the emotion side, less macro, more micro much. 01:24:25 Speaker 5: So women aren't just what men are, not. 01:24:28 Speaker 1: No, they're different sides of a species coin, right, So you have human species, you have male and female, and there's differences. So I could also posit it separately. A woman is more compassionate, a man is less compassionate, So I could there's two ways to word it. But do you think that there's a problem about trying to force women to be too masculine. 01:24:48 Speaker 5: No, I don't think there's a problem. 01:24:49 Speaker 1: Okay, well I disagree. We have a crisis in this country. Why do you I'm curious, why do you think that we have so many unmarried young thirty something women. It's the most in the history you have recorded data. 01:25:01 Speaker 5: That's a good question. I don't know if I've ever pondered why we have unmarried. 01:25:05 Speaker 1: Why do you think that it's the young women are the most depressed, alcohol addicted and psychiatric drug addicted in history? 01:25:12 Speaker 5: Is that true? 01:25:13 Speaker 8: Oh? 01:25:13 Speaker 2: Yeah, the most miserable they've ever been. I'm just curious. What why do you think that is? 01:25:16 Speaker 5: Yeah, I guess I would. I would say that I think it's because like the society that we live in, right, like capitalistic, consumeristic where there's like constant processing and overconsumption that includes like drugs, alcohol. 01:25:31 Speaker 1: Over so women going into the workforce a lot could create a lot of depression for them. 01:25:36 Speaker 5: Yeah, same with men. 01:25:38 Speaker 1: Okay, but then shouldn't women, like I don't know, stay at home and have children and do what they're designed to do that make them happier. 01:25:44 Speaker 5: You have the more most depression that they have right now in this country could make the same just made for women. 01:25:50 Speaker 2: I'm asking questions. 01:25:51 Speaker 1: I'm saying, maybe the men are upset because the women that they're trying to date are more interested in taking care of cats and trying to become partner at the local law firm. Yeah, and they say, I don't want to get married till I'm thirty, And maybe that creates a sense of despondency when a young male being raised in this country sees everything rigged against them. 01:26:10 Speaker 5: So do you not believe that women should be working? 01:26:12 Speaker 1: Of course, I think I believe in liberty. I'm just asking, has there been an unintended tragedy where we have the most financially successful thirty to thirty five year old cohort of young women in history? 01:26:24 Speaker 7: Men? 01:26:25 Speaker 2: Well, again, the women's history. 01:26:27 Speaker 5: Like men and women are and depressed. 01:26:29 Speaker 1: The women are far more depressed than men. The men are depressed. 01:26:32 Speaker 5: But you just said that the men were more depressed and that's why they're. 01:26:34 Speaker 1: They're more suicidal, and they're largely more suicidal. 01:26:37 Speaker 5: They're more suicidal, but they're less No, they're. 01:26:39 Speaker 1: More successful at committing suicide than women. 01:26:42 Speaker 5: Oh, that's a big difference. 01:26:43 Speaker 2: Okay, yeah, women commit su women. 01:26:46 Speaker 1: No, it's true women try to commit suicide more, and yet women will go through three or four attempted suicide attempts. Men usual in the one. 01:26:52 Speaker 2: You can look it up. It's just the way it is. 01:26:54 Speaker 1: But I'm just curious, what is it about the thirty to thirty five year old female. Do you think there might be something missing? Do you think that there's like this biological urge to get married and procreate that we might have been suppressing because it is the least child it's the childless, least married cohort in the history of the country. 01:27:11 Speaker 5: Yeah, I believe that marriage and reproduction are beautiful things. 01:27:15 Speaker 1: I do. 01:27:16 Speaker 2: Do you think we should encourage it more for young women? 01:27:20 Speaker 5: I think we could encourage like a deeper understanding of people's individual sense of self and then through that, if people can better understand their wants and needs and become more self aware about who they are and what they need, that ultimately they would lead them to like better and more efficient decision making for themselves. Okay, whether or not that means marriage. 01:27:41 Speaker 1: Last question you posited this, how would you define the patriarchy? 01:27:45 Speaker 5: Oh, the patriarchy so patriarchy like the epistemology of the. 01:27:50 Speaker 1: Word, or just like if do you believe it exists in the country today, or yeah, I. 01:27:54 Speaker 5: Believe patriarchy exists. Patriarchy comes from poter, right. Potter means father in Latin, so patriarchy is father over or men over, so it's like a men ruling, right. So we see it in the fact that God or the divinity is represented as men, which was only happened like halfway through the history of humans, so it was like a matrilineal matriarchy society for a while. We see it in the fact that women take men's last name. We see it in the way that in the way that men are viewed, or like men view women, and how women kind of have to adhere to the way that men want them to be portrayed. And I agree with you that porn is what would you say, toxic? Toxic? Yeah, And I think that's an aspect of the patriarchy, right, Like if you go on a porn website, which I'm sure you haven't in a while, but. 01:28:49 Speaker 1: To be addicted though, yeah, woll could I encourage everyone to break free of that addiction? 01:28:53 Speaker 4: Yeah? 01:28:54 Speaker 5: Me too, Yeah, me too. That's great, proud of you for that one. Yeah, but if you go on a porn website, you can see that, like the view of all of the porn is from the perspective of a man, and it's of a woman, and these kinds of aspects show that right now we live in a society where it's it's a man's view, it's men over, so like we're all taking on. 01:29:16 Speaker 2: Yeah, I thank you for that first. 01:29:19 Speaker 1: On the porn thing, eighty five percent of people that consume porn or men, so they're obviously going to shoot it in a way that is more attuned to men. For example, what if women? 01:29:27 Speaker 5: What if it was shooted for women, and then. 01:29:30 Speaker 1: Then they would change, they would change the perspective because they're they're in it to make money. The same reason why lifetime movies don't have rock and roll music and they tend to be very like uplifting, flowery, emotional based, and hyper feminine in the writing because most people that watch lifetime movies are women. 01:29:45 Speaker 5: What's lifetime movie? 01:29:46 Speaker 2: Okay? 01:29:47 Speaker 1: A lifetime movie is like a field good movie on cable TV that has like a very poorly written narrative and usually ends in some sort. 01:29:53 Speaker 5: Of like re mark. 01:29:54 Speaker 1: Yeah like homek Yeah, yeah, that's that's the best way I could I could got it. But thank you for the dialogue. I appreciate it. 01:29:59 Speaker 5: Yeah, thanks, thanks you too. 01:30:01 Speaker 1: Thank you, good luck. 01:30:02 Speaker 2: Thanks. 01:30:05 Speaker 4: Sorry. 01:30:05 Speaker 17: Just to clarify, I'm not a very big fan. I'm aware of Turning Point in USA, but I don't watch a lot of stuff. I don't really have like a theological or political question. I have more of a question about like dialogue and like the purpose of kind of these meetings, because looking into Turning Point us say, it's really just an organization that's meant to like spread awareness of like your political beliefs, being like pro Christian, pro Republican Party, more Trump, I guess. But my question is, do you think that this platform or like this discussion of like politics in this way is useful because, like, for example, the guy that you talked to a little bit ago about vaccines, you had a lot of stuff to say to him that he couldn't really counteract in that moment, because just coming from it, you are a professional that this is your job, you walk around doing this, and so you just have more facts readily available that aren't necessarily very fiable. So it's kind of hard to argue a point, whether it's right or wrong, and whether or not you have the equipment to do so. If you just automatically have points that we can't really verify. 01:31:13 Speaker 1: You guys are welcome to bring phones or notes or phone a friend. Well, yeah, but then you bring a professor. Toot, Go bring a professor, bring to bring the whole. I'll debate them all. No, go find a professor, bring them down, and let's debate whatever you want. I mean, I meaning like yes, to answer your question. You're coming this in a good way. I do think this is effective. Look at the crowd you've already assembled. And I think that free speech is a bedrock of American society. And to be able to pursue truth and find out we agree or disagree, or have my assumptions challenged. And I do this all from memory. I don't have any notes here. You guys are welcome. You're not professionals. You're able to bring whatever you want. But yeah, look, I think that on this campus, especially it is a predominantly homogeneous left wing campus, especially amongst the professors, And to have a conservative be able to sit here and take adversarial questions. I think it also gives confidence to other conservatives here on campus to speak up when they might hear something they disagree about, or give them conviction to maybe say hey, I don't agree with that, and so I think that has a lot of value. 01:32:13 Speaker 17: Okay, just one more question on the meeting itself, because I understand the point of like kind of validating conservatives ability to talk. Obviously, we don't want to just kind of shut them up. That's not a very good course for dialoguee Yeah, But I think at the same time it's also these are all posted on the internet, right. 01:32:33 Speaker 1: Well, they're posted in its entirety. Yes, yeah, correct, But as long as unless somebody says you know something that you're insane. 01:32:40 Speaker 17: But usually for again, as someone who doesn't watch Turning point us say, the only thing I see from talks like this and similar to like I don't know if you associate with like Steven Crowder or but he has very similar like come and talk talk about these things. The only thing I ever really see from that is more sensationalized conversations like shutting down. 01:33:01 Speaker 1: And sometimes I feel like this dialogue can become Yeah, I mean again, you could look at my YouTube channel. We post hour long clips of these deals, so you see the clips because they lead to the longer form, but both are posted for sure. 01:33:12 Speaker 17: Do you think it's because it leads to the longer form or it's it's easier to watch and more entertaining. 01:33:17 Speaker 1: I mean, look, you're competing for eyeballs against literal pornography, Hulu, Netflix, and sports. So when people are wont to engage with content around politics, you're trying to win people over, right, But also we want to have integrity for the conversations that we have, which is what we do with our a lot of our YouTube videos and our longer form content. So okay, thank you very much, appreciate it, keep watching, man, thank you. Are you a Satanist? 01:33:40 Speaker 18: No, it's I know, I know, Satan's not real. 01:33:41 Speaker 1: I'm not that Oh okay, yeah, no, Satan is very real. But yeah, you can put the mic up. 01:33:46 Speaker 2: Satan is very It. 01:33:47 Speaker 18: Does relate to I wanted to ask. I wanted to ask like, well, first, are you a Christian? 01:33:51 Speaker 2: Very very much so? 01:33:52 Speaker 18: And I wanted to ask like, like, why is that exactly? 01:33:54 Speaker 2: Oh, Jesus saved my life. I'm a sinner. 01:33:56 Speaker 1: Fall short of the glory of God, gave my life to Christ's most important decision I ever made. 01:34:00 Speaker 18: So you believe the Bible is real? 01:34:01 Speaker 1: Yes, I believe the Bible is true and real. 01:34:03 Speaker 2: Why is that? 01:34:05 Speaker 1: Well, I could give you the technical answer. There's never been an archaeological discovery that has contradicted the truth of the Bible. We know everything the Bible, as far as the kings, as far as the succession of Israeli rulers, to the Jewish people being put in exile to be put back into the land of Jerusalem, to the destruction of the Temple in eighty seventy. 01:34:21 Speaker 2: All that checks out. 01:34:22 Speaker 1: There's never been a discovery that's contradicted it. From King Hezekiah to King Cyrus, to Nehemayah to Zuribebel, to this destruction of the creation of the Second Temple, and then of course the wisdom. There's not a truth of the Bible that if you apply to your life, your life does not improved dramatically. And then finally we have the most accurate and transparent, the most historically robust account. I should say that one can have of the most important figure ever to live in the history of the world, Jesus of Nazareth and Jesus of Nazareth, who was born in virgin birth, we believe is the incarnation perform miracles all throughout Juday and Samaria eventually confronted Pharisees, led to a death that he did not deserve, was in the grave for three days, and then rose from the dead. And the resurrection is the is the pinpoint of my belief that Jesus did rise from the grave so that we may live. 01:35:10 Speaker 18: So what about like the stories of Greek and Roman mythology, do you think any of that is real? So then what makes Christian mythology real? 01:35:15 Speaker 1: Well, give me an example of Christian mythology that I can do, like creation, so. 01:35:20 Speaker 18: Like Genesis story of like David and Glive for example. 01:35:23 Speaker 1: Okay, what's actually pretty easy to deconstruct. A sling is actually a rather lethal weapon, especially for someone in a Judaian tribe that's trained to use a sling of a young age. And Goliath was a rather clumsy individual. And if you're able to pinpoint a rock right between the temple lobe, you can effectively kill or lobotomize an individual. So that's hardly mythology, all. 01:35:46 Speaker 18: Right, So what about what about the story of Satan's fall? 01:35:48 Speaker 1: Then what about in Ezekiel. Yeah, so that's not mythology, but that is theology. So in the story of Satan's fall, in the later books of Ezekiel, we are told that God the heavens and the earth. God created the angels, and there was a rebellious angel, Lucifer, who led a rebellion against God and brought one third of the angels with him and then created what is now is the underworld. Is the best Hebraic interpretation of that which we now know as hell. I could go through every single story Jonah and the whale parting of the Red Sea, right Ahab on Mount Karma with Elijah. Here's my answer. If Genesis won one and the Resurrection is true, anything in the Bible is possible. You're looking at the greatest miracle. The greatest miracle is creation. The fact that we have an ordered, intelligible world where we can exist and that human beings are able to flourish. 01:36:37 Speaker 2: That is a miracle. 01:36:38 Speaker 1: In the beginning, God created the heavens of the earth and Hebrew. That is better sheet in the beginning. And then the fact that Jesus rose from the dead and I say, how do you know that Jesus rose from the dead. Well, show me another historical piece of a story where so many people willingly died a brutal death for a lie. Every single person around him had everything to lose, and yet they went to the absolute death, from Paul to Peter to the half brother of James, saying that Jesus is Lord. Jesus rose from the dead. Not to mention, if you were going to fake a story, you would not use female witnesses. In the ancient world. In the scriptures it said that the women were the first one to see Jesus Christ. If you're trying to fake a story, you would never do that. Not to mention the five hundred people that I saw Jesus after he rose from the dead, doubting Thomas, and then the later church that lived under persecution under the belief that Jesus Christ was the son of God. 01:37:24 Speaker 18: Our one loss goes. So do you think do you think Christiania should be forced onto everybody? 01:37:28 Speaker 1: No? No, I don't believe Christiania should be forced. Then it's not love, it's rape. So we believe that God loves you, so he will not force you. And so if you reject God, you will go to Hell. I hope that's not the case for you, guys, because you can give Jesus Christ so you can live life eternal. But it's a love story, not a forced story. And so it's this option in front of you. Will you surrender in front of the cross? The cross is this idea that the perfect, the divine, came down and took a human form and died the most brutal death the ancient world knew the most tortuous, brutal death that someone could possibly know, and then rose in the dead the defeat deaths that you could live forever. 01:38:00 Speaker 2: And so it's a gift. 01:38:00 Speaker 1: They're right in front of you. If you take that gift, it transforms you from within, changes your life. You have joy and happiness that you otherwise would not have. But you have a conscious choice to reject that, and I hope you don't. And if you reject that, then you will go where you want to go, which is in absence and the furthest distance one can be from the Divine. 01:38:21 Speaker 2: I go to college. 01:38:22 Speaker 1: Campuses, and there's a lot of error. We're all sinners, we are all live in error. We as Christians are called to go into the public arena to correct error with truth. What is God's Planmen, I go on to college campus. I just believe I will only tell truth, I will not compromise, and I'll love on the loss. Purpose will give you happiness. You see, we live in a country where they think that happiness is pleasure. We know that purpose is above all of this, serving God, that we are made in this image, that there is a struggle of good versus evil. Every day you get to fight for what is good and what is true and beautiful. God should be the most important thing in your life. Jesus Christ is your lord and says your most important pot Beyond that, it's getting married, having children, building families, leaving a legacy, doing. 01:39:05 Speaker 2: Big and great things. 01:39:11 Speaker 1: Taking the deep, but sometimes the difficult road is the way that you should configure your life. Getting married and having children is a difficult but deep decision that I hope every single of you make, because for every single one of you, there are a couple thousand students that wish they could speak out like you do. Encourages a choice. We are no longer going to accept comfortable losing. We are no longer going to accept excuses from our elected officials. We have more combined political power than they have ever allowed us to believe. We are the party of people that shower before work and shower after work, the people that get their hands dirty, the people that protect our streets, the people that built this country. 01:39:59 Speaker 2: What can I do to say the country? Do you answer that question every single day? 01:40:02 Speaker 1: If you are doing the work to save this beautiful republic, you are doing something that is bigger than you. America is the greatest country ever to exist, period, bar none, is the greatest country ever to exist. 01:40:18 Speaker 2: Right I'm 01:40:31 Speaker 10: For more on many of these stories and news you can trust, go to Charliekirk dot com.