Amala Ekpunobi
INSANITY: Charlie Kirk Debates 25 Woke College Students
Jubilee hosted a debate pitting prominent conservative pundit Charlie Kirk against 25 liberal college students on abortion, trans women, Kamala Harris, Affirmative Action, and more. Let’s watch and react.
Become a Patron: https://www.patreon.com/AmalaEkpunobi
Join My Discord Server: https://discord.gg/Ehk8Ud4H6T
Watch or Listen on Spotify: https://spoti.fi/3LNbCV1
Apple Podcasts: https://apple.co/48k9yNU
Follow Me on Social Media:
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/theamalaekpunobi
TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@amalaekpunobi
X: https://twitter.com/amalaekpunobi
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TheAmalaEkpunobi/
- Broadcast on:
- 19 Sep 2024
- Audio Format:
- other
When you need meal time inspiration, it's worth shopping Kroger for thousands of appetizing ingredients that inspire countless mouth-watering meals. And no matter what tasty choice you make, you'll enjoy our everyday low prices, plus extra ways to save, like digital coupons worth over $600 each week and up to $1 off per gallon at the pump with points, so you can get big flavors and big savings, Kroger, fresh for everyone, fuel restrictions apply. Feel your max with Brooks running and the all-new Ghost Max 2. They're the shoes you deserve, designed to streamline your stride and help protect your body. Treat yourself to feel good landings on an ultra-high stack of super-comfy nitrogen-infused cushion that takes the edge off every step. Every day, the Brooks Ghost Max 2. You know, technically, they're a form of self-care. Thanks. Let's run there. Head to BrooksRunning.com to learn more. Hello, everybody, and welcome to the show. I'm your host, Amal Evanobi, and today we're going to be doing a fun video, a jubilee reaction. This is not a middle grad. It's not a spectrum. The new show they have called Surrounded, where they brought Charlie Kirk into debate 25 liberal, shall we call them? Well, college students, let's be real, and they're not too liberal. Now, interestingly enough, I was considered to be the conservative in this show, and jubilee was like, "Hey, we're going to be launching this new show. We need a conservative to come and debate all these college students," but they had one other person lined up ahead of me. And I literally told Taylor, I was like, "I feel like it's Charlie Kirk. I feel like it's Charlie Kirk." Like, who else could they possibly be looking for to debate a bunch of college students? It's got to be him, and it did, in fact, end up being him, so that's what we're going to react to today. Of course, we got Taylor in that field. Hey, well, I think it'll work out in your favor, though, because they've got to have you on eventually, and hopefully they worked out some of the kinks with this format that a lot of people in the comments were a little bit critical of. But overall, I mean, 10 million people almost have watched this thing by now, so it's been coming, so. Yeah, this is a big one. Indeed, and we're not going to waste any time we're going to get right into reacting to this video. We may skip a prompt because this is an hour and 30 minutes, so whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, we'll feel it out as we go. Without further ado, this is Jubilee's Surrounded. Sure. I think that-- Yes or no question? I think that a person who is a sign mailer-- Is this-- Baby girl. Did I-- I have it speed up only to 1.25 today. I don't think they sign mailer birth, so people are not mailer birth. I think that a person-- See, your evidence that college is a scam, my friend. So what are you saying some cases women's values are murderous? Of course not. I'm not murderous. So what's the difference between an IUD killing a conceived zygote, because like a mother going to Planned Parenthood and killing the fetus in her room? That was actually the best point somebody made. It's not about the cell, it's not about-- No, I'm speaking. No, I'm speaking. No, I'm speaking. No, no. Kamala Harris is here. I'm speaking. I'm speaking. Speaking. Speaking. No, I'm speaking. No, I'm speaking. No, I'm speaking. Hello, everyone. I am Charlie Kirk, founder of Turnipoint USA, and I am surrounded by 20 Woke College. Okay. My first prompt is abortion is murder and should be illegal. Okay. Starting with a heavy hitter. Okay, now, are you not embarrassed? I could not. I'm sorry. If they did it surrounded and they were like, "Hey, we're going to bring together. We're going to have one liberal and like have a bunch of conservatives debate this person you want to be a part of it." And you tell me I have to run to a chair in order to debate-- I'm out. I'm sorry. I'm not going to be participating in it. You know how foolish and demeaning this is. They could have figured out a better system than having somebody run up to a chair to go ahead and talk. And you know like the most intelligent among these people is not going to stoop to the level of running to a chair to like push other people out of the way. So you're just asking for the most audacious, you know, faux confident people to run up and engage with him. So we'll see how that goes. Can I meet you? Okay. Hello. What's your name? Juliana. Nice to meet you. Nice to meet you. Can we get our terms right first? Yeah. Okay. Abortion is the forcible ending of the viability of a being in utero. Otherwise known as a fetus. Okay. We agree that to abortionist. Okay. Great. And then murder is the intentional taking of life different than killing or sudden death. So murder would be the intent with intent taking another life. Do we agree with that? Okay. Okay. And then we agree that murder in general and society should be illegal. Yeah. Okay. Great. So yeah, no, I do want to preface that I'm a Catholic. So I think one really important thing that the Bible says is to not judge and just going back to the topic. I think there's a big difference between, you know. Oh, look at Taylor said, um, I'm like, where are you going to this Bible says a lot of stuff and there's a lot of things that are, you know, meant to be put together in broader context. And also, I don't even know that you could give me the chapter and verse that is being referred to. It's just kind of a very like, you know, low resolution argument that I see incoming. So yeah, my eyebrows raised a little bit. Yeah. I already know I'm not going to have fun with this one. I'm not religious. It's very religious, clearly we have some, you know, other religious folks who are going to be debating this back and forth. And honestly, when you get into like the crooks of an abortion debate, it's just some people think it's fine and others don't. And that's really the heart of it. And I don't know like how much further you can go in debating like, when does a life begin? When does it end it? Is it constitutes murder? Is itself defense all these different things? We just, you know, disagree on whether or not you think it's fine. And even I go like back and forth and my head over different topics that I'm sure will unpack in this debate as they go back and forth. But it's such an exhausting debate to watch amongst, you know, many other topics that I'm sure we'll get into today. Cells in utero than a living, breathing existing being. And while I do believe it's murder and that's just my personal belief, right? I don't believe in telling people what to do with their bodies. It's not up to me and it's not up to us. Okay. So the students can raise their flags when they would like a different speaker, which is another I get it because like you have so many people here and you want many to be able to speak. But like as soon as you go off the rails or you say something that they disagree with, it's just going to be so difficult to get a word in advice as well as Christian judge. Should we prevent murder in society? For sure. Yeah. It should be illegal. But I think that it's really different, right? Because, you know, these people aren't. You've moved voted off the item. Sorry. Nice to meet you. Honeymoon. Bye. No, I'm not that face. She's making it. Uh-uh. Okay. Bone to pick before we even let this girl speak. I don't even know what her name is. I think it's Naima or something like this. Not shell tagging me on Twitter saying, "Amala, this is you in a different universe. This is Amala in the multiverse. This is leftist Amala right here. I have the receipts. Okay. Of you guys saying this about me. Amala might just be me, but there's a striking resemblance here with me and this girl. Maybe we do look a little similar. Okay. Uh-uh. Not. This is you in the wrong timeline. Be so thrilled with me. We got a super chat just now too that says, "Amala, the girl with the dreadlocks is you as a teenager, isn't it?" Please. We're going to listen to her. Thank you. How accurate. Y'all's claim is that this is me in a different timeline. I'll be sure to let you know if I think it is. Okay. Naima. Nice to meet you. Okay. Can I just ask, um, at how many weeks do you think that a fetus is viable? Well, viability and moral worth are two different things. No, but I'm asking you at how many weeks do you think a fetus is viable? Well, at about 20 weeks, a baby can survive outside of utero. So it's actually 24 to 26 weeks? Well, it's 20. The youngest ever in a NICU unit actually happened in San Diego, not far from here. And we survived it 20 weeks. Okay. So under Roe v. Wade, 93% of abortions happened in the first 13 weeks of pregnancy. That's 93% of the abortions happened well before a fetus is technically viable as a form of life. Now, here's what I'm talking about when it comes to the abortion argument. You fundamentally disagree as to whether or not abortion is okay and for very different reasons and through very different, you know, frameworks and worldviews. So her framework is now viability. This is a more religious framework about life beginning at conception. So it's like, how can we even talk to each other about this? We fundamentally disagree on the issue. Neither of these people is going to change their minds. Neither of the students that walk up is going to be like, oh, suddenly I'm going to appeal to your Christian framework. And I 100% believe in God now and believe in the things you think about abortion. It's just a very difficult topic to get any sort of movement on, but that's not necessarily the goal here. It's just to see who trumps the other. Now, a lot of people are tweeting out, she ate him up, you know, she ate him up and it's getting like 300,000 likes on like X and stuff. So apparently this girl has some energy, some charisma. She said something worth noting. We're going to find out. Let's go into viability. So what is it about? Let's say a six week baby that has a heartbeat, it's own DNA fingerprint brainwaves that is less moral worth than an 88 year old right now with dementia in a home down the street. That person requires assistance, requires help. Why is it that the six week baby is of less moral worth? Well, first of all, it's not a baby. It's a fetus. What does fetus mean? A fetus is in utero. What does fetus mean in Latin? What the f***? I'm sorry. It means little human being. This smile is very creepy. Okay. Smiling is creepy. No, your smile is specific. Got it. But let's go back to I think we need to do like, oh, we should like we should have done a drinking game with this. If a leftist launches a person personal attack on him rather than actually contending with the argument, take a drink. I'd be wasted. I'm sure by the end of this and I don't think he's going to make any personal attacks on them. It's really interesting. You can watch as somebody gets flustered or they feel like they've been backed into a corner that they can't exactly get out of as soon as he asked her like, what does fetus mean in Latin? You saw the defensiveness almost like she wanted to bottle it up but just couldn't possibly she like vomited her defensiveness on to him. Is this a language class? What the f*** are we talking about? Okay. Let's say, very calmly, you know what, I actually don't know what fetus means in Latin. Can you enlighten me on that and let me know? But there automatically, I think many of these students are coming into this space knowing like I have to one up him and Charlie is probably coming with that same energy. You kind of have to be if you're going to be in a room with 25 people who want to get at you and really own you on these subjects and it doesn't give way to very fruitful conversation. But that's not necessarily what we want right because that's not good TV. So we're losing track here. But what species is the fetus? The fetus is not a species yet. It's technically classified as a parasite until it is viable. No, I want to talk to you about something very quickly. I can't really get past that. Are you saying a baby is a disease or a tumor? A parasite is not a disease and a tumor. Those are not the same thing. A parasite is defined as something that cannot survive outside of its host. A baby, before it is viable, cannot survive outside of a woman's womb. You got it. Okay. You birth a baby, right? Without any intervention, like no doctors, no mom to breastfeed that baby, do anything. How long does that baby survive without a host? Just because it's not physically attached to your body anymore, that thing is not going to survive. It can take in air and it might live for a little while, but it physically depends on somebody else to keep it alive. It's an interesting thing that with the abortion argument, because they are pro-abortion, they feel the need to invalidate the life of the being that is being taken away. And really, your argument should be, yeah, I mean, scientifically, it's a life. I just think it's morally okay to take that life and here's why. Here are the practical reasons that I think it's okay. Here's the burden that I feel like unloved children or children that are not wanted place on society, but people are not willing to make those arguments because of how it sounds. But that is your true logical pathway to justifying abortion and justifying a pro-choice stance. Not invalidating the fact that it is a life that is being taken, because it's just a fact. So we need to talk about why there is a moral ground for making that a justifiable choice. And I'm wondering if any of these students is willing to actually go there and be on it. And the fact that she feels like she needs to make that sort of dehumanization argument to me is evidence that you feel the truth is kind of evident to you underneath it and you know how poorly founded that is. But just before we get back into it, out of curiosity just went up and looked up the dictionary definition of parasite versus embryo and fetus and I'm going to read this real quick, parasite is defined as an organism of one species living in an organism of another species and deriving its nourishment from the host. Human embryo or fetus is an organism of one species living in the uterine cavity of an organism of the same species and deriving its nourishment from the mother. This homospecific relationship is an obligatory dependent relationship, not a parasitic relationship. It is an invading organism coming to parasitize the host from an outside source, a human embryo or fetus is formed from a fertilized egg, the egg coming from an inside source being formed in the ovary of the mother from where it moves into the oviduct where it may be fertilized to form a zygote, the first cell of a new human being. So there's just a little dictionary definition might help us out in this one. So did she eat? Did she eat? I think she's starving actually. Let's extrapolate that. Let's extrapolate that. It is not a living organism. Are old people with Alzheimer's and dementia that are being assisted every day? Are they parasites? No, they're not parasites. They're human beings who are on the brink of death. Got it. They're not going to be able to survive. My four-month-old that requires mom's breast milk and requires daily changes and feedings cannot survive without its own. Is my four-month-old the parasite? Your baby can breathe on its own. Your baby can drink water. For like, how long, baby girl? Come over. Come over. From its mouth to its stomach. But it cannot. Your baby can eat foods. Can it gather? Can it reason? But that's not what qualifies something as being a living organism. Being a living organism simply means can you survive outside of a womb, outside of your host? Got it. So I just want to make sure I'm clear. Why does that then equate to moral viability? It equates to scientific viability. Why? Under what standard? Because it is not alive and you are advocating for the rights of something that is not technically a life. Got it. Well, sacrificing the needs of the human woman who is alive. Got it. But a mom can survive without the baby in her. Uh-huh. Right? Yes. The baby cannot survive without the mom. Yes. But a mom cannot survive without her lungs. So it's not her body. It's in her body. It's not her DNA. Yeah, I know. So it's not her choice. So it's a- It actually is directly her DNA. Just two different views on the matter. I just don't know what you want me to say. There are plenty of like very valid, like pragmatic pro-choice arguments that I'm very interested to see how he contends with those. But that is just not one of them. Just arguing viability. I don't know. It's not. Not for me. It is 100 percent. It's 50 percent of her DNA. Half her DNA. He's gonna win. I'm telling you. This could take a while. Okay. First of all- Do we have our terms correct? We agree? Actually no. So first of all, I'd like to refine our terms. I got it. Two points to bring up after that though. So you define murder is like intentionally like killing a human being. I think that's a very poor way to define murder because if someone were to like break into my home and point a gun at the heads of me and everybody I love, and I intentionally kill them to prevent them from killing my family, I don't think I murdered them, right? So I would define murder as the unjustified termination of a human life. You're making a good point. Let me further clarify. Yeah, I guess it's just if do you have two categories of murder? Do you have like a justified murder versus an unjustified murder? Do you have like a lawful murder versus an unlawful murder? It's an interesting point. So self-defense is very warranted. Exactly, right? I can see where you're going to go with how that has to go with abortion, but we can go down that in a second. Yeah, yeah. So I mean like I kind of do. I want to give you my argument in so far as why I'm pro-choice, why I think it's justified. But first, I think that your position is quite absurd, right? Because you're saying that it is murder to kill a human being at any point in development, especially when it's in the mother's womb. My question to you would be, well does this make women with IUD's murderers? Because it is the case that in some scenarios an IUD will allow for conception to occur, meaning there's a unique human life there. I do love it. This guy's very smart. You can tell. He's well articulating. He's doing a good job. He's looking at it from very unique angles. I just do love the energy that somebody brings to an argument when they feel like they've like already owned you before you've responded and they're like giving their point out and like looking at you so intensely and all this stuff just chill. We can really like bring the energy down and just have a conversation. It's not like, and I understand the format does not really give way to that sort of thinking you're on a timer or like everybody's watching you. They're putting up red flags as you're speaking, but chill. But it will prevent its implantation intentionally killing it. Well, no, preventing implantation is not necessarily the same thing as terminating a fertilized egg. For example, if you take plan B, again it's not the same thing. Preventing the production of progesterone is not the same thing as terminating a being that has been fertilized. You do not know for a fact that the egg has been fertilized. You do not know that. We even know IUD. And preventing fertilization or implantation to the uterine is killing a conceived zygote. So what happens? A sperm goes into the egg, right? The egg becomes fertilized. It's a conceived zygote. In some cases it will prevent the implantation of the conceived zygote killing the conceived zygote. In some cases, correct. So what are you saying some cases women value these are murderous? Of course not. I'm not murderous. We do not know for a case. That's like saying that. So what's the difference between an IUD killing a conceived zygote because like a mother going to plan parenthood and killing the fetus interval? Well, so you're asking, you're asking two separate things. If they knew for certain to be more clear that I have a fertilized egg and I'm going to take a drug to prevent that fertilized egg from attaching to their uterine wall, then yes, that is an act of killing or murder, of course. So then this is the other thing that we get into with the abortion arguments. It's like if you take a strong stance on abortion, people have to find like a specific instance where your stance no longer holds water and then people are trying to like defend and safeguard themselves of like, oh, no, actually, I don't think that's OK. So then I guess an IUD is murder. And I think just be like, you know what, there's some things that we're going to feel OK with and something's we're going to feel OK with. When I'm like listening to abortion arguments, I'll tell you the ones that I am more sympathetic to. When people are saying, I want to get rid of IVF, I'm like, oh, I don't know that I want to get rid of IVF. There's plenty of couples that need in virtual fertilization and you know, want to create kids. And yeah, that can lead to like a sperm meeting an egg and then that having to be destroyed. It's just like a fact of the matter and that's something that, you know, when I hear about it, I'm sympathetic to that rape, incest, actual instances of forced pregnancy. I'm like, you know what, I'm sympathetic to that. I will definitely hear out arguments in that case. And I think maybe Charlie is on that same. I don't think he's on that for his like own personal choice or like if his anybody in his family had that, but I think he's like open to states that have exceptions for those things. And then, you know, since Roeby Wade has been overturned and it comes down to the state, if I live in a state that says, yeah, you know, abortion's okay. And that is the way the majority of people stand on the issue. Hey, you know, it's not a choice that I'm personally going to make for myself, but it's down to the states and the states made the choice. I don't know like what else you're going to do about it, you know, at the end of the day. So we try to like catch each other on like the what about this one instance in 1965 where a woman took Plan B and she actually had a sperm had met the egg and that was destroyed and she technically had an abortion. Shouldn't she go to prison? It's like, dude, do we really need to be going through this right now? I guess we can talk about it. Okay. So do you think all murders should go to jail? Do I think all murderers should go to jail? I mean, on the third on third degree murder, however, no, I don't think women that got abortions or had IUDs should go to jail because I think that they have been deceived by mass culture and mass propaganda. Secondly, the people who should go to jail are the abortionists who are the ones that have been putting the abortion pill, the ones that have been doing procedures, the ones that have been going into the third trimester and breaking babies backs and inserting them with syringes while the babies are crying and suffocating being born alive and then being dead on the operating table. That is who should go to jail. Oh. That was actually the best point somebody made. Good old handshake. I know. It's good. That's nice. Okay. Whenever I'm talking about this discussion, I always go to the question of what about in the case of the mother when her life is in danger because- Oh, yeah, that's one I forgot to mention. Yeah. You know, cases of medical, just afflictions and things like that. I'm a big believer. I don't know. I'm still iffy on if I think it's a or if it's murder or not, but even so, and I don't wanna say murder is just fine, guys, wait, let me just get this one point and then you can vote me out and give me one second. Say the mother gets pregnant and she knows that if she gives birth, she's gonna die. She has some kind of health complication. Then what do you do in that case? It's a serine infection. I don't know what that means. It's a C-section. They do it. They do it in search. Guys, wait, hold on. Excuse me. One second. They go right below the belly button and they deliver the baby and after she doesn't have to give birth, it's technically birth, but it's much safer. So that's actually safer than an abortion procedure. I mean, yeah, it's an option for some medical cases. It's not gonna be an option for all and then some women might be too vulnerable to undergo surgery and that's a whole 'nother thing. So I get what the point she's making and I get the point that he's making. Sorry. Sorry, Lily. Hi. What's your name? DeeDin. Nice to meet you. I would say with abortion, I think it's very complicated, but I think the issue that I have primarily with your stance of being pro-life, that there's no nuance, there's women who are being forced to travel hundreds of miles to access abortion care, even in cases of rape in certain states that they're not giving any sort of allowance for that. And I think a lot of people who are pro-life, they say they're pro-life, but I feel like they're really pro-birth because with firearms, the United States has some of the highest firearm deaths. Wow. All these red flags up. What did he say? Really caught that off guard. Not on the CD nations, right? And we can acknowledge that that's for children who are actually living and breathing. So I feel like abortion, well, yeah, I can definitely see your point. I just think that it should be allowed in some circumstances. Okay. Great. I'm happy to get into the gun violence stuff later, but I want to really stay focused on abortion. Right. You can say you see my point. Can you see the world also where, since we know it's a human life, that it should be illegal, since we don't allow murder in our society? Well, that's where I have an issue, because abortion is not being done willy-nilly. The life of the mother is always- How many abortions do you think we have every day in America? I'm just guessing. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm honestly not sure maybe, I don't know, a thousand? 4,000 a day. So it is kind of willy-nilly. We have 1.6. When you need meal time inspiration, it's worth shopping Kroger for thousands of appetizing ingredients that inspire countless mouth-watering meals. No matter what tasty choice you make, you'll enjoy our everyday low prices, plus extra ways to save, like digital coupons worth over $600 each week, and up to $1 off per gallon at the pump with points, so you can get big flavors and big savings. Kroger, fresh for everyone. Your restrictions apply. The thing that you're aiming for is less abortion, right? That would be what you would want, or at least no abortion. Eventually, it's also a protection of those that can't protect themselves. But yes, and that's why once we, after the reversal of Roe vs. Wade, we saw abortions go down dramatically in Texas, Alabama, Mississippi. We saw thousands of babies that are now alive and well that are able to have amazing lives thanks to the reversal of Roe vs. Wade. I don't think a lot of that is true. I don't think a lot of that is true. I don't think that the overturning of Roe vs. Wade led to less abortions. It is, but it's not true, because when you make abortion illegal, it doesn't actually decrease the amount of abortions that happen. So that's a nice talking point in Texas. That's so funny. When you make abortion illegal, it doesn't actually decrease. I would venture to say it does decrease the amount of abortions that happen. Now she'll say that people will go and receive abortions through illegal means or unsafe means. And that definitely happens, but not at the same rate at which abortion was happening under the law, legally, okay? Numbers show differently. Birth rate has gone up. Yeah, legal goes down. But illegal abortions still happen. Abortion still happen outside of whatever data you're showing. That's not true, but let's just say. So if you want to, well, first of all, if you count the abortion bill, you're right, but that's a separate thing than a chemical abortion and surgical abortion, different things. And I'm not debating. I'm not debating you. I'm debating her. So if you want to do the flags and come back in, try and be faster next time. So let me ask you this. So the question is we should try to limit unjust suffering of human beings, right? Sure. Okay. That's my position is that there's unjust suffering of anywhere between 1.4 to 1.6 million abortions a year of human beings that are being massacred in the womb. Okay. And so that's not a woman's rights issue. That's not a men's rights issue. That's just a human rights issue. Okay. The best way to decrease abortions happening is proper sex education. Making abortion and making abortion illegal does not actually decrease the amount of abortions that happen. So what is your evidence? Well, it does. So I don't know. We can talk about the best way and talk about whether or not sex education should be coupled with everything that's happening. And I think I totally agree with that. People need to be educated on pregnancy, how one becomes pregnant, what your options are once you do become pregnant and they need to be given proper avenues to make choices that don't lead to unplanned pregnancy. So I can agree with her on that. I don't know what is going to be more effective than the other, but certainly we should couple sex education with whatever it is we do going forward when it comes to abortion, whether or not we're living a majority pro-choice society, which I believe is going to be what happens anyways, because it's down to the states and that's how the majority of people feel. So either way, yeah, sex education is very important. What is my evidence of that? Because we have increased sex education the last 30 years. No, sex education is so bad in America. So, by bad, what do you mean by that? We have more access to birth control for young kids. We have more kids that are learning youth birth control at a younger age. We have more of that in our public school system and we've seen all the trends actually go in a negative direction. So in fact, we see that the more sex education there is, the more disturbing those trends are. So you say that, let me ask just one more thing. You say that if we make abortion illegal, people will still do it. Should we then just make gang violence legal? No, I'm saying if you actually wanted to decrease the amount of abortions that happen, you wouldn't be advocating for, like, to make abortion illegal, you'd be advocating for all of these other things. Does that logic apply to stealing, looting, kidnapping, arson, and murder? Well, actually it does, because those are results of different societal issues that you should be educating yourself on, rather than making it illegal upfront. Should we make kidnapping, arson, burglar league? Again, it's just like arguments over, like, how do we make this thing, you know, how do I invalidate his argument and how forceful he's willing to be on making abortion illegal? And then it's like, how do I prove to them that this is murder and this is the taking of a life? I'm waiting for somebody to come up and say, it's the taking of a life. But let's talk about, you know, if the millions of kids, these unloved children who are going to be in broken households or whatever, are born into the world. Let's talk about the burden that that place is on society. Let's talk about how that affects crime rates and chronic illness and lack of education and homelessness and drug abuse and all these different things. I'm waiting for somebody to come up with that and to hear the back and forth on that issue, because if I were a leftist sitting in this position, that's what I would come with. And I think Charlie Kirk would maybe respond to that and say, you know, the typical argument will just because somebody is unloved or because it's going to place a burden on society. Does that mean that their life doesn't matter? Does that mean that we should be able to cut off, you know, that avenue? And then the leftists would say, yeah, I agree with that. And that's why you don't get anywhere on this topic, I don't think. That's a very, very tough not to crack this one real quick. We got a $50 super chat. I'm going to read. We read those immediately. This is from Chris Tech Trucker says, Hey, hey, I was baptized Catholic at 13 turned Protestant in college, then became an atheist. Why you've been all over the spectrum after several years, I'm now unsure, but like Fox Mulder, I want to believe all I know is these leftists are evil and America needs a revival to survive. So there's a lot of different stances over. Yeah, calling things evil, saying we need a revival, but not being an unsure spot after going through the full gamut. I mean, it's interesting. And I'm not surprised that you're here because there's a lot of people from across the belief spectrum that are here with you. So thanks for chime and interest. Yeah, you're on a journey, my friend. I don't believe that they're evil. I think they're just misguided a bit by the ideology like that murder legal because their symptoms are something else. We should be helping society heal from those things. We got to answer the question. We want less of those things. So we just make them legal and we'll get less looting. You know, actually I'm going to let someone else think. I want to hear what he would say. Like if what if a leftist is like, well, you know, if you allow all these children that are like going to be unloved and like, you know, not going to be able to contribute to society and all these different things, like there is going to be more stealing and looting and an actual like murder, an actual murder from their frame of reference. Hi, Parker, nice to meet you. Yes. Nice to meet you, Charlie. Big TikTok guy here. So like pedophiles, people who were married to children in the past and normalized in that society. Should they go to prison? A pedophile. Like if you could go back in time, would you put those pedophiles in prison that was that married those children? Because it was normalized. They were deceived into thinking it's okay. Would you put them in prison? You have to slow down. Sorry. I recognize him from TikTok. And yeah, this is his whole like persona. He's like a debater. I keep I see him because he's always like on TikTok live debating people and stuff. And he's very like this, but it seems even more intense in in this video, the all right, slow down, calm down. I'm not a cop. I'm not a cop. Good response. The death penalty. No, so you'd go back in the past, you'd given the death penalty, even though they were deceived into thinking it was okay, but you said people who get abortion to our women should go to prison. It's not currently illegal. Okay. Regardless. At that time, at that time, it wasn't. No, I would not go back and retroactively enforce laws where things were currently not illegal. You wouldn't put pedophiles in prison in the past. Hold on a second. When was it illegal? When was it legal in America? Well, child marriage was legal in America throughout the early 1900s and especially throughout most of society for thousands of years, especially in the Old Testament and in the Bible, right? Well, hold on. Hold on a second. So where is the Levitical law that allows you to marry a child? Oh, gosh. So we're going to get into a biblical. Well, I can't in the first, but the particular conditions that are listed in the Bible are that you have to beat physical maturity and emotional maturity, which is extremely vague and throughout society has been seen to be met actually. There is not a verse, but let's kind of go back. Okay. So when is it a magical perception? Let's go back. Let's go back. Well, generally agreed upon it's 18 years old. But let me ask you a year ago. But you don't go based upon what's generally agreed to go based on the Bible. I say 18 years old. But let me ask you a question. Where's the Bible? When does life begin? Conception. The conception. Great. So should we protect all life at conception? I care about sentient life. So when do brain waves start? Do you think brain dead people should be able to pull the plug on like a family should be able to pull the plug on an individual? We've got an answer question. When do brain waves start? When do brain waves start? You can see brain waves around six to eight weeks, which in brain dead individuals are brain waves as well. So the brain waves necessary produces objective experience on that until around. Can you see it from my perspective that at six to eight weeks, those brain waves will actually increase, not decrease, have allowed the process of development to continue. Did you know those same EEG scans exist in brain dead people? No, no, but the difference with the brain dead people is that the likelihood of those brain waves actually increasing is very low. At six to eight weeks, one by 15 weeks, they can hear the moms voice. It's impossible. It's irreversible sensation. That's what brain death is. I don't really know that. But no, it's not coma. Dude, I can't write this energy at this actually create. I don't know. Like it's creating a very anxious feeling to myself like you guys need to chill and I think, of course, Charlie's just responding to the energy that he's bringing and you kind of you get into the system of of matching, but do chill out like you don't need to. We're all here to listen. You've got the floor. Dude, you got to the game of musical chairs and you got there the fastest. You could slow down. You're doing a red herring. Go back to six. What's a red herring? Six to eight. A red herring is where you you avoid the topic and you say something that is adjacent or symmetrical to what I'm saying, but not actually I'm saying, so that's not a red herring. That is the definition of right here six to eight week baby. If they're allowed to continue to develop, what ends up happening at a certain point, it will become a sentient being in the same way that if I keep engaging in sex with my girlfriend, they'll be a baby in the future. You don't care about unless you're in fertile, which we don't know, but let's let's see. Let's see the process of development, right? That was you didn't need to say that unless you're in fertile, which we don't know. I don't know why you would say that. So personal attack on his point. He's now even from the girl making fun of the way that he looks, but yeah, this energy. Not good. And then I'm like, oh, he's eating, he's eating, like he's eating Charlie. Oh my God. We're just waiting for our little arctic talky boy to like get in there. She's like, I see a lot of people echoing the sentiment in the comments, like interrupting somebody and like fast talking over them, which is what a lot of people do in this space is not winning. Give it space. Like if you if the truth is on your side, if the argument is on your side, you should be so chill. You said you should have such a calm demeanor and expressing that to somebody because yeah, if the truth is on your side, the truth is on your side. Right? Why do you want to answer my question? Why do you have the ability or the right? Should those child P three has got a present. The process of should the pedophiles go to prison from 1904? How many pedophiles are alive from 1904? They're not alive, right? I meant like if you can go back in the past hypothetically speaking and you could put them in prison. What do you put them in prison? I would have killed them myself if I was alive. Okay. So then so then you don't apply it based upon what people are deceived to believe. You apply based on what you consider to be moral. It says the women who had abortions, you think they should go to prison. So why should women who get abortions go to prison? I've never said that. Mom, this is not Santa Claus, it shouldn't go to prison to be a constructive debate if you keep on talking over me. Why was finishing my statement? You were talking over me. Let me ask you a very simple question. Do you think it would be a good thing if we had less abortions in America? It depends on the context. Like are the abortions prior to sentience? Yes. Because I think all abortions. Oh yeah. No, it would not be necessarily better unless it is the case of the people who didn't want the abortions and it would be negatively impactful to their health medically. Are you against the late women after sentience? Yes. Okay. So you believe in an eight week abortion ban? Yeah. No, no, no, I don't. Sorry. I believe in an abortion ban after 18 through 26 weeks. Okay. That's a more reasonable position. I have to give you credit for that. It's similar to trumps. 15 weeks? Yeah. So why do you think that most people don't share your view on that? Well people just don't really know what sentience is. There's not a lot of conversation about abortion and these conversations are very difficult. Like they're conceptually hard to go through. You're making this conversation differently. You're making this real difficult. Okay, he's just said something that is a, I think, a pretty reasonable response as far as like a liberal versus a conservative, he's saying 18 weeks on. That's when I think the cutoff should be. We could have started there, but we could have done that. I understand why a lot of people don't understand for sure. They're positions on it. I think people are aware of the most coming around, but I thought we weren't cutting people off. I was actually cutting off the money. Oh, now he's voted off. Okay. Well, I wanted to see where he was actually going with the pedophile thing, even if it is like a little bit of, you know, speaking or beating around the bush and getting around the topic. But I wanted to see where that was going to go, but whatever, I'm sure he'll be back with his energy. He'll be back. Are you nice to see you. So I just have one question. There's like in any case, you don't think there's any case where abortion should be legal. Again, calm down. I'm not a cop. Very, very rare couple cases. Okay. So you do think that a couple cases is legal. If, if cesarean section is not going to save the mother's life and the mother's life is actually at risk, which is debated amongst growing numbers of OBGYNs, that is the only case where abortion should be allowed, but people say it is a growing consensus in the pro-life world that abortion is never medically necessary. Okay. So if you had a daughter and she was 10 and she got ripped and she was going to give birth and she would, no, wait. Oh, and she was going to give birth and she was going to live. Would you want her to go through that and carry her with this baby? That's awfully graphic. It's no, but it's a real life scenario that happens to many people. It's not necessarily wrong to be asking this question and to be putting him in the mindset of thinking through this hypothetical. That is okay. It's the energy that she's bringing to asking the question that makes it a little bit more malicious than it needs to be. We can say like, I want to talk about like these very vulnerable young women who find themselves in a situation of actual forced pregnancy. You have a daughter. How would you handle that situation within your own family? It doesn't mean like what if your daughter was raped at 10 years old chill because it sounds like you want it. Like it sounds like you're actually want this situation to befall me with the energy that you're bringing. Yes. The baby would be delivered. Oh, okay. Great. So I, that's insane. Let me tell you why. No, hold on. Let me ask you a question. There's two ultrasounds I have. One is a baby conceived and one is a baby conceived by a loving couple. Which one is which? Which person here? Which person here? Which person here? Which person here? Which person here? Which person here was conceived by? Tell me which one was conceived by? You don't know. Exactly. Because it's all human rights and it's human beings. But that doesn't matter. It's, but it's about your daughter who has to give birth to it and it's going to be tortured by that, but the rest of her life. You are not. That's going to take away every freedom she's ever going to have that's going to ruin her life. She's going to grow up and she's going to be attached to another thing. The point is how you were conceived as irrelevant to what human rights you get. But when you hold on a second. If a person conceived and walks on the side of the street. It's not like they don't get First Amendment rights or Second Amendment rights. It's not about that person. The worst thing to do to that daughter is to then say, "Hey, we're going to go murder the being inside of you." They wouldn't even know. Like listen. I think it's a very extreme view on his part, but it is a view that many people hold. I'm trying to put myself in that mindset of like, "I have a daughter and this situation has happened to her and she's 10 years old. 10 years old." I mean, we've been talking about transitioning children and all this stuff. There's only so much you can understand it 10 years old. I'm thinking about just how horrific that is and how I would be able to sit with my child as a parent to fully explain the situation at hand, to fully explain the options that are at hand and to hopefully place them in a position to be able to express how they feel about the situation from the mindset of a 10 year old. That's already a very difficult thing. I cannot come out and forcefully say, "I would force my child to go through this situation and have the baby," which I believe is a stance that Charlie's putting forward. It's an unimaginable situation and a really tough one. If my 10 year old was hardly advocating, "I cannot go through this. I don't want to be pregnant," I have to hear that out. It's a ridiculous thing to happen to somebody. That's what happens with these abortion conversations is we leave out the 90 something percent of people who are not in the situation of rape, incest, actual forced pregnancy and then we veer off to this small percentage of like a 13 year old who got raped at school and is now pregnant, which we need to hear that out all day and talk about the situations and talk about the options for children that go through an unimaginable amount of trauma when that situation befalls them, but also let's talk about the 97% of people who are just getting an abortion because they had a little bit of reckless sex and ended up with an unplanned pregnancy. I pulled up from Heritage Foundation. It's 1% of abortions are from rape and it's about a half percent from incest, so it is important to realize that for 98% or 97 and a half, we're not talking about this issue. It's always a very extreme example that's been similar to how they use the intersex thing in the trans debate, which I'm sure we'll see very shortly. It's always these extreme examples and then applied to the bulk of them, which are really the thing in question. 100%, always the most radical examples and you're at the tough thing to think through. I can't tell you how I would handle that situation, but my gut leads me to believe I wouldn't force my child to do anything that they don't want to do in that situation and I would try my best to extrapolate the mind of a 10 year old to figure out what's going to be best for that child. Lesson, lesson, lesson. But wouldn't it be a better story to say something evil happened and we do something good in the face of evil instead of saying we're going to do evil and then murder the being because we're going to pander to the evil? No. What makes the West great is that we do good after evil, not evil after evil. It's not about the being and the cells, it's not about, no, no, no, I'm speaking, no, I'm speaking, no, I'm speaking, no, I'm speaking, no, I'm speaking, no, I'm speaking, no, I'm speaking, no, I'm speaking, no, I'm speaking. She's insufferable. Wow, wow, wow, just imagine, imagine like you're a boyfriend or something dating this girl. Oh, what a tough situation. No, I'm speaking. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about the person, no, no, I'm talking about the person who is dealing with the pregnancy. I am not talking about the cells, I don't, I don't, no, listen, the fetus, the whatever, I don't care about that right now until it is formed. If there is a, if there is a five year old child who is pregnant and the baby is two weeks in Europe, actually they have and they have given birth. Yes, there is one, there is one recorded case of let's see, Lena medini of Peru gave birth via C section at five years old. Talk about a radical and extreme example. Hey, that gave birth. Is that, is that common? Yes, not common, it's common, five year old get some times and it's, if they get pregnant, I think they should be able to have medical access to something that could save not only just their life, but like their livelihood. How many, how many? I'm curious. I hope your daughter lives a very happy life and gets away from you. Okay, so that is really nasty and. People are clapping for that. That's crazy. So her, her belief system, just so we're clear is that, yeah, no, I got it. It's fine. I mean, again, if you feel sound in your arguments, typically this is not the energy that you have. Typically you are not going to be this angry, you're not going to be this temperamental. You will be able to like remain calm and it does speak to maybe a little bit of extremism in your viewpoints, even if Charlie is also being extreme in his. It's insanely nasty and we'll talk again. Okay, we're going to skip this next prompt. It's, I believe college is a scam, which it is in some cases. It isn't in others. For these 25, I'm feeling like it is. I'm feeling like it might be a scam for these individuals with the arguments we've gotten so far. We're going to move on to Charlie's next one, which I feel like is more, you know, a sign of the times this next, this next day. We're partnering with us on this episode. Okay. Now let's get into it. Yeah, my next claim is that trans women are not women. Trans women are not women. Okay. Of course. Boom. Who's up? Sam. Nice to meet you. Hey, Sam. Let's define our terms. A woman is an adult female of XX chromosomes. You tell me what is a woman? I think a woman is tricky question for this bunch. Who identifies as a woman. Got it. So that's not a definite. When? Okay, guys. Quickly. When you're defining a word, but the word you're defining finds itself in the definition. Let's restart. Let's rework it. If you're a defining woman and you put woman in the definition, let's go back to the drawing board. Definition that's like saying a table is something that identifies as a table. Give me an objective definition. No, it's not. A table is an object. A table can't identify as anything. It doesn't have a choice. It doesn't give me an objective definition of what a woman is. If I decided right now that I wanted to identify as a woman, I would be a woman. Hell yeah, Sam. Samantha. Am I right? Okay, but that's not that doesn't answer the question. I know, but right now I'm a man, right? So if that happened right now, I'll be a woman. Once a person makes the decision to identify as a woman or a woman. That's a separate issue. What is a woman? That's the definition. No, I know, but you have to tell me. A person who identifies themselves as a woman. But you have to identify, how do you know that they are that thing? How do I, I don't need to know what they, I can ask them if I want to know. But there needs to be. He's just not ready. He's not ready for this one. Put the flags up. Come on. Let's get him. Let's vote him off the island. You need to tell me what that thing is though. Somebody who. Okay, sorry. We're not getting anywhere. We're not getting anywhere. We're not getting anywhere. We're not getting anywhere. We're not getting anywhere. No, no, no, no. It's important because it's like saying a giraffe is a thing that looks like a giraffe or a coyote. It's called circular reasoning. You have to give me a actual definition. I don't have to, I did give you a definition. No, no, no, you said that a woman is something that thinks they're a woman. That doesn't give me a definition. That's simply. What would you consider a definition then? An adult female with x-x-x. No, no, no, I mean like what, what makes that a definition? Oh no. Okay, poor guy. That we don't need to say anything. Move on. Just up. Hello. He was there first but give the seat to the lady. That would be the, the leftist in you operating. Hi. Julianna. Yeah. I don't necessarily think that you can define a woman just by her chromosomes. Women are so much more than that. They come in a variety of shapes, sizes, colors. Hell yeah. And I don't necessarily think that you can count out somebody who's trans just because they don't have a certain set of chromosomes. There are also people who are born, I'm trying to, I'm drawing a blank. Intersex. Yes. Yes. So x-x-y or y-y-x. Or just y-x-0 with nothing. So, so, so natural mutations upon the binary essentially, right? Yes. But they don't have both sex organs that both, that both operate, right? Yeah. But that also, I don't think necessarily works, right? Because if it's x-x and there's- One is more dominant than you. So you're either more male or more female, right? So you might have both the penis of the giant, but there's never been a case to someone who can impregnate themselves. Okay. I also don't necessarily think that works for the situation, but I also want to say that one of my best friends is trans and I would say that she's more of a woman than I am. Love that. What does that mean? What does it mean she's more of a woman than you are? This is just virtue signaling. That was a virtue signaling statement. She needed to position herself as somebody who is knowledgeable on the topic, so I have a breastband who is trans. That accomplishes that. She is more of a woman than I am. Couldn't be more of a false statement, but it makes her feel good to say that. And you know, you'll hear a lot of women do this, particularly on the subject of like transness or they'll say like trans women are more women than we are, they're more feminine than I will ever be or like some trans women, you know, play out femininity more and more than I ever could. And it comes off as like a virtuous thing to say, but it's actually them feeding their own egos. They get to be a morally good person while also uplifting somebody who is in no way an actual threat to them as a woman because they are not a woman and women do this all the time. They'll pick the most like vulnerable of their group, their most downtrodden of their group, the least threatening, least intimidating person in their group and really like hype them up like, yes, queen, you're so gorgeous. You're so this. You're so intelligent. It gives me a sense of moral superiority because I'm so good to bestow this like positive energy upon you. But you're also never going to be in a position to threaten me in any way, shape or form. And you'll see a lot of leftist women do this specifically with trans women because it achieves two things at the same time. Guaranteed, your trans friend is not more of a woman than you are, not scientifically neurologic. And there's just no, in no world is the person more of a woman than you are. I think that women define themselves by multiple things, not just their sex organs. If somebody asked me who I was as a woman, I would not say I have a vagina. Totally fair. No, I think you said something smart. So you said that person is more of a woman than you are. Therefore, you're grading off a definition of something accomplishes womanhood. What is that? Yeah. I think it's, well, that's a thing too. And I do think that gets a little complicated, right? Because there are social norms for a gender, but I do think we try to break that, right? No, for sure. But you said that specific friend is more of a woman than you are. Why? I think she's a better person than me. I think she lives life. Right. She's a better woman than I am. I'm not saying women are better people. No, but no, but what makes a woman a woman, because you said she's more of a woman than you are. So I want to know what that definition is. Right. Okay. I'm going to let somebody else go. That's, you know, that's the thing. I can't answer that question. I'll let somebody else go. That is totally fair. You didn't know exactly what you were saying. You led with the feeling that you have towards that individual, and it didn't end up working out as a logical argument. And that's fine. Thank you. Okay. All right, what is the woman is an adult human person that has a desire to be in accordance with a particular set of social and cultural norms that are typically associated with female sex. No, define a man. They're typically, okay, so he's saying a woman is a person who decides I want to be more in accordance with attributes, traits, a likeness that is attributed to women, which leaves a lot of gray area because then you have to decide what those social and gender norms are for femininity. And then you have to contend with people who say that they are trans women who are in no way shape or form, conforming to what are the typical feminine traits. So what do you do with a biological man with a full on beard who dresses very masculine but says I'm a woman and is in no way conforming to the social norms of womanhood and femininity, but claims that they are a woman. I think Parker would validate that that person is also a woman. You also run into this trans medicalist argument where there's a big debate amongst the trans community. A lot of trans people say you're not truly a trans woman until you're trying to look more like a woman, until you're undergoing surgery, you've got top bottom surgery, you're doing facial feminization, you're on hormones. And there's a different sect of the trans community that is saying you do not have to be anywhere in your medical journey or in looking like a woman in order to identify as one. So Parker is drawn the line in how much you are living in accordance with female norms. So he needs to define what those norms are. And he also needs to contend with the people who are not living on those norms. Define a man. You're looking at one. X, Y chromosomes. Okay, but does God the father have X, Y chromosomes prior to incarnation? We literally have a religion back to Bible, back to Bible, which is we're going to get you nowhere because so many people are not operating for that framework, including myself, but he's a father and he's he him, but he's not a man. We have a religious. Wait, so a man is someone with X, Y chromosomes, but he doesn't have X, Y chromosomes and he's still a man, he still refuses, but it's actually very interesting in the original Hebrew, Adonai, do you know what Adonai is? It's a Hebrew word for God. It's actually genderless, but in this end, actually in the scriptures, they use he, right? And they use the masculine, Jesus Christ came to earth as a man, not as a woman, not as gender, and this has nothing to do with the argument at hand. Literally has nothing to do with the argument at hand. But let's go back to God, the father's a man, right? Well, well, first of all, there's a Trinity. So God, the father is neither man nor woman, he is omniscient, omnipotent, he is all being on top. So why is he? Well, this is why I would have loved to be the conservative in this case because I can actually meet them at least on the worldview of engaging with a secular society. Because once you inject religion into the framework, which is how Charlie operates within the world, then they'll come at you from religious standards. And it's not even standards that they hold for themselves or the worldview that they have. They just want to invalidate yours. So it would be great to meet them with a secular conservative who is also going to engage with them on the scientific nature of the discussion, which I'm sure Charlie will get to. And Parker's just trying to kind of do the whole red herrings again, even though he claimed that he knew what that meant and Charlie didn't. Well, I did not. The scriptures do. You could use woman, you could say her, you could use him, but the way that the language is structured. Again, God, the father is so above gender, it is so above any of our understanding and why he's with glory and understanding again, because you have to make a choice, either he or him, him or her in the original scriptures. Let's go back to. I'm happy to get into that. Men and boys. So some fathers are not men and boys, not men or boys. I'm sorry. Some fathers are not male. No, of course they are. I'm not. Wait, so God, the father is a male? Who am I? God, the father. So where do you get God, the father from? Oh, I can't. I want to say things that are not, I'm not going to say it, but just the energy, his face, the, this I'm winning thing that he's doing is just nuts. What Greek word? Well, from Abba, right, which is a very close personal. You're not answering my questions and you're bringing up random language. That doesn't matter. It actually does. Oh, he's so arrogant. He's so arrogant. You get down to the root of it because I, because he's not a man, you know, he's not a man out of your world. You still use a preferred pronoun. He's still calm. A man. Christ is a man. You don't do that with trans people because you're transphobic. That's why. Okay, got it. Taylor. What? He's using God's preferred pronouns. Preferred pronouns is like a neo-logism, a new word, a new idea about language that has been introduced in the last one. I don't know. Mainstream, five years or so and you're projecting that onto the writing of scripture and the way that Hebrews is translated in it, it's just silly. Which is what they do and they did this with the abortion argument. They're not actually going head to head with your argument or your view on, you know, life and abortion itself and whether or not it's a pragmatic solution to the world's problems. They try to find a particular instance in which you haven't validated the foundation of your argument. And in doing so, they think that's going to somehow, I don't know, domino effect, destroy the rest of the things you think about transness and women, which it doesn't work. Even if Charlie Kirk looked him in the face and said, yes, I use God's preferred pronouns. That doesn't then validate the human beings all around us that are asking us to abide by they, them, starburst self, Lorax self, all these dumb pronoun. It doesn't validate that. But Christ is a man. I'm happy to get into the sexuality and gender. Before incarnation, he's not a trinity, okay? Before incarnation, there's no penis, there's no XY chromosomes, there's no small game. A lot of seconds. Let's think about it. If that's correct, how is it then Jacob saw the face of God? Okay. So hold on. If there was enough before the incarnation, how did Jacob see the face of God? How did Jacob wrestle with God? Characters cannot face the biology. How did Jacob wrestle with God? So okay, do you think that he has a body? Well, that's a figurative notion of Russell. That's a mystery of the scriptures. Oh, brother, this guy stinks. Get him out of here. Please. I need my red flag. Theology. Can we go back? I was like, yeah. What do you say? There's only one red flag. And it's because, okay, I'll tell you exactly why Parker is not getting the same amount of flags. This group, this hive mind group has already deemed him the smartest on the hierarchy. So they're like waiting for him to go on. They've probably all seen him on TikTok. They know out of all the people who are there, he's going to hit him the hardest and he's going to be the best at just like maneuvering through the conversation. And they probably don't, they're not following a lot of the argument that Parker's making. So they're not raising their flags to call them out on it. Trying to pivot because you know this debunks you. What biology does your God have? Well the one of Christ our Lord. But I guarantee probably the strongest and smartest amongst this group is somebody who's not even been in the seat yet because a smart person would not be, you know, battling out intellectually in this way or like fighting to sit in the chair. No, I meant right. Before incarnation. To be honest, I don't quite know and I don't know the scriptures, so you don't know what a man is. Well, you can't define what a man is. You know, this like the face, the face that he's pulling a little opaque. Again, you're looking at a man, but your largest video on TikTok is what is a woman 20 million views? You don't know what a man is in your own world. I said you're looking at a man, right? Wait, but the father doesn't meet that criteria. My looking at a man. You are. Okay, good. Just make a man that's beating you in a date right now. That's fine. So let me ask you a question though. So do you think that anybody can become a woman? I think that anyone who meets my criteria is a woman. What's your criteria? Again, adult human person that has a desire to be in accordance with a particular set of social and cultural norms that are typically associated with a female sex. Can society ever be wrong? Sure, but like it's a desire to be in accordance with a set of social and cultural norms. Can I become black? It's not society is right. I know because it's not a desire that you have to be in accordance with a particular sense. What if somebody norms to be black? Because race is defined phenotypically based upon the expression to other people. But your body. There are a ton of non-normative trans people by the way, so I don't know what he's talking about that it needs to be driven by some sort of desire to be in accordance with norms. They're like sexually perverse trans people who have no, no interest in being part of societal norms whatsoever. And there's also like this sort of like gender fluid gender bender version of transness. No desire to be in accordance with any sort of social norm. And then of course the people who just don't adhere to femininity in any single way but are referring themselves as trans they sort of self identified trans people which is another issue that is not yet been brought up judging that you think there's a phenotypical expression of someone who's white and someone is black like I see your white because of your phenotypical expression. Right. So but do you think but Rachel Dolezell that said she is black and culturally black is she black? Does she does she have phenotypically characteristics? To find phenotypical. I'm not sure what that word. It's going to be the like the the expression. So melanin content. Do you want skin? Yes. Okay. So she she could pass as a black person. Wait so she doesn't have the melanin content. She's borderline. No heavily. And she's not black. Okay. So you're able to say who is black and not black. That's how we define it in society. No. Okay. Got it. So but is there an objective definition of who is black? Language is all subjective. Linguistics professionals indicated subjective. I mean, Charlie could turn around and say it no matter what you do to be in accordance with womanhood. Do your chromosomes change? Okay. Well, then you're not a woman. So like where are we going with this if anything it makes more sense to be trans racial than it does to be transgender because there's so much like movement and different cultural norms surrounding race and so little when it comes to sex, scientific sex. Language is all subjective. Yes. Absolutely. Every word you just used was created by the other human beings that are engaging in conversation. No, no, I think it's pretty by God, but even then it's still subjective. But now we're getting somewhere. God's a subject. Now we're getting somewhere. Is the word and the value behind murder objective or subjective? Well, I think morality is subjective, but you think it's subjective. It is. He comes from God. That's interesting. Wait, does it come from God or independent of God? Well, no, it's of course, comes from God. That's subjective. That's subjective. Yes, it is. It comes from God. It's specifically subjective. It comes independent of God, then it's objective. No, it's objective. What you just told me is God is subjective around moral anti-realism. So let's go back to the Ten Commandments. You don't understand metaethics. Well, hold on. What is subjective morality means? What is subjective morality means that it comes in everybody's own opinion, their own form, not... True dependent on a stance. Again. God is a stance and that's the truth of morality. So if let's let's let's believe, do you believe in the, if everybody believed in the concept of God, the transcendent God, that there was a Ten Commandments and we should live by them, right? Is that objective morality? No. Just because people agree to make it a objective, then what... Again, independent of a stance. What is a variance? What is objective morality? Charlie doesn't view God as a stance. It's just like going to, it's, and it's going to be an endless back and forth on this one. Finally. Sorry. Bye. Bye Parker. We'll be back at it next time. Bye bye. So far away from the prompt. Yeah, I know. Okay. And trans women are not women. Here we go. I recognize this guy. Okay. So I think it's a little scummy that you're plagiarizing in the whole Matt Walsh thing. Like your thing is the worship of Israel and I think like I hate him. We got a $50 super job. We're going to read those immediately from Jeff Reidmaker. He says, "Tell me you hate God without telling me you hate God." I'm assuming in reference to Parker, which he does seem that way. I'm not a particular fan of religion myself. But yeah. I don't know. He had brought the energy and the discussion of God in the conversation. Like he, like you said, he brought up this whole thing about God being a male or whatever in order to invalidate Charlie's argument through some trickle down effect that's not really clear. Yeah. Instead of actually focusing on the issue at hand. Yeah. He brought the energy. Yeah. And he keeps doing it over and over. That seems to be his thing that he wants to do here. Well, it's easy. Okay. For sure. Well, do you want to talk about sex first or do you want to talk about gender? I don't think gender exists. It's a term that John Money and Judith Butler created over the last 40 years that basically is a filler for personalities. Okay. Well, if we're talking about sex, which it seems like you're saying is the exact same thing, would you say sex is binary by definition? For sure. Yes. Absolutely. And they're already able to interact. Like sex is not binary. It's by modal. So if you look at a distribution graph, we're going to see people in two camps majority of the time. But there are going to be externalities on both ends of the spectrum and in the middle. For example. Yeah. We're going to talk about intersex. However, with intersex though, they are mutations of a binary, correct? No. Let me talk about, hold on, but we're talking about an entire spectrum, which your bi-definition defeating your expression of what a binary is by saying that there are externalities. But let me ask you a question. Okay. I mean, it's a, now it's become a semantics argument. He's saying it's by modal. Charlie is saying it's a binary. He thinks the, I guess the existence of intersex and, you know, her mafforditic people, whoever, whatever you want to use, no one always use that term anymore, it makes it by modal. And Charlie's saying, no, we exist in a binary. Those are just externalities to the binary. And then they're going back and forth on this, you know, who does, who is it that I heard says, right? Like Michael Knowles or something like that. It was debating with students and said, you know what, human beings have 10 fingers, right? So we read in our, you know, in our books, in our science books, human beings have a tongue, they have two eyes, you know, if you have a kid, it's born with three eyes, 11 fingers and no tongue. That doesn't mean that now we have like a spectrum of how many fingers human beings have or we have a spectrum of how many eyes human beings have. That means you have somebody with a particular affliction, and that is what it is, an affliction who now falls out of the typical way in which we view human beings. There is man and woman. You have people who are born mafforditic or intersex. And you know what, we would do that as an unfortunate situation, an unfortunate affliction. But it does happen. And that does not invalidate the fact that there are men and women, which, yeah, I don't know. It's like, Charlie, you're trying to create this one box and then use any examples that are outside that box to justify that box again. You brought up intersex. We're talking about reality. You brought up intersex. Okay. Sex organs, which one is more dominant? What do you mean? In an XXY situation. Can you explain your point of view? Yeah. I mean, obviously you have more female characteristics and male characteristics. Just say I don't know. You could have just said, I don't know. I didn't really answer that question. Please tell him, enlighten me, but he said, can you please explain your position because he doesn't want to give the ground of not knowing something in the debate. And this has been multiple times so far. Just say you don't know. In an XXY or it might be YYX. One of the two. The point is that you do not have both. We could see people with female reproductive organs that have XY and we can see the vice versa. People with male reproductive organs that have XX. So I think you said something about gender, though. I think that's more interesting to get into. Okay. Do you understand how the conversation-- So we're moving off of sex because you're-- No, be in that argument. No, I'm not seeding it. Okay. You want to keep-- No, I should have played that through. He did do a little. Let's move on to another topic thing there, definitely. Going into it? We can? Okay. So besides male and female-- Okay. Now he's abiding and coming back into it. Categories exist. We have people that are intersex. We have people that are on the other ends of the bimodal distribution graph. Are you aware what bimodal means versus binary? Somewhat of an understanding. Okay. Well, you can be presented with a graph after this by the people that you brought with you. But it's actually-- Again, personal attack and for what reason is people that you brought with you supposed to demean him and say that he has some sort of posse. He's a very busy, pretty famous guy. So yeah, I think you would have some people with you. Make that make sense. Actually, if I-- So just like constantly going to condescending type talk is not going to be through here. I'm just trying to match your energy with the people that you treated that were trying to have a conversation. Got it. So-- Who did he treat poorly? Who did not treat him poorly first? Please. Be careful. Enlighten me on that. Trans women are not women. Okay. Do you agree with that? I would say that trans women are women because people that exist under the category of women, people that exist under the category of men are still human. So that category, how is that defined? Well, I went limited to things like genitals or things like chromosomes, which seems like you want to do. What kind of genitals would you say I have since you're so excited about it? I'm not obsessed with genitals, but I could do a blood sampling right now and I could see exactly what you are because every single one of your trillions of cells are either coded with XX or XY. Also, let's not mess around. You probably have a penis. Just be here. I'm going to be straight up with that. And if you don't have one, you've managed to conform to the look of somebody that typically would. It's like you're not going to want up somebody with this argument. Much surgery, whatever. I think that you are a man, but you could fool me. You could take hormones. You could play camouflage. Like I could fool you to be Hispanic if I had the right Hollywood makeup director. That doesn't mean that you are the thing, though, but you're going from an objective biological perspective, which we've already talked about with sex. I'm talking about a social construct or a social utility. If we were at a restaurant, I think you're a man and I'm sitting down at the table and you're telling the waiter, "Hey, I want to go sit with blank. What would you use?" He doesn't know my name. Yeah. Well, I'm sitting over there. That guy. Yes, correct. That guy. You're going to typically use key or hand or you're going to say that guy, like you just said. Correct. Because you're ascribing the male gender to me based on my protective characteristics. Yes. I could be an heir. Maybe you are a biological woman. And then you'd correct yourself, right? So that's exactly what we're trying to say is. So the question is that do you think that womanhood can then be assumed just through costume design? It's not costume design. What is it? It's performative social character. It's not a costume. It's performative. I'm not acting. I'm performing. That is too funny. And it's so funny because the very nature of something being performative signals to me that it's inauthentic. So it is not in accordance with who you actually are as a person. It is a persona. You are performing for me. And the trans community and people who defend this sort of ideology say, I'm just being authentic. I'm just being who I truly am deep down, no, you are performing. That's okay. Let's just admit that that is what you're doing. You are not living in accordance with who you actually are. You are performing and you might be a very feminine man. You might be a very masculine woman. Those things are okay and you can live out life in that way. But anything beyond that where you're trying to switch up genders and pronouns and undergo hormones and surgery and all this stuff, you are performing. Yes. That's what gender is. Okay. Great. Got it. So it's like a theater troupe. It's not a theater troupe. So these are social. These are social. So womanhood can be appropriated. No. They're categories. That's what it is. So there's nothing inherent about the chromosomes. There's nothing that correct. Yes. Wow. We disagree. So there's nothing inherent about having a period or being able to give birth or the specific hormonal makeup. In other cultures, we've ascribed that to womanhood. If you go back to other cultures, spending thousands of years, you'll see a difference. No, I know. Right. You'll see men giving birth in other cultures. We've just ascribed that to womanhood in our particular culture. It's just a modernity of ours. That's for example, the Mayan said plenty of people that were schizophrenic, right? So that means nothing to me, right? Okay. We have people that say they're hearing things from God. Would you say that's schizophrenic? Well, not necessarily. Always backs the Bible, which is why you should have got a secular person for this one, buddy. We've built Western civilization and common law and due process and individual rights. I just wanted to hear that your defense of the unborn and the greatest civilization ever. You know, that voice from God happened to build the greatest nation ever to exist on the history of the world. That's fine. I think the Mayan said the same thing. That's the problem with presuppositional arguments. Let's go down to that. You can say anything. Can we go visit the Mayan nation? Can we go visit the Mayan nation? You think that's real? We go visit the Mayan nation. They didn't last that long, did they? Yeah. Over killing and violence. And you can justify that if you like. You mean all the child sacrifices. And this is the kind of thing you're telling us why I'm trying to match it is because I mean all those child sacrifice, the Aztecs Mayans and Inc. instead on the top of temples. Great. So you want to go back and hold a testament. Let's bring Parker up in here. We'll talk about the child. Hold on. No, no, no, no. We're off topic. We're veering off. Let's get back to where we were. Child, marriage, and we can talk about the justification of rape. Where was child sacrifice ever in the Bible when Isaac was almost sacrificed by his dad? He wasn't though because at the beginning of Genesis, so God just said like, no, just kidding. Don't actually know why because at the beginning of Genesis 16 said I'm going to test to prove obedience. Yeah, that's right. Now you know it. So actually, no, there was no child sacrifice in the Bible. It was a problem. Not a good topic. Not a tough thing to be on for this subject matter. I do have a verse in my wilds about this, but hey. The vision on child sacrifice, but anyway, that's a little bit of a rabbit hole. Do you understand at least, can you sympathize with our perspective that that I'll comment down a little bit. I apologize for the conversation. No, it's fine. I mean, but you're doing it. That's good. But did you see how where this could get wildly out of control? At least I don't see how to get out control because even in sports, for example, you think that there's no there's no. So this is this is something that we might be able to agree upon, right? Because we're not archaeologically dug up, right? The rules of sports, they are things that we've created as a society. We've decided as a society, the most fair categorization is male sports and female sports. Now as we've been able to understand or at least bring it to the forefront, people who don't identify with the bindery, we still have to allow all people that are women in the women's category and all men that are men in the women's category. That includes cis and trans. No, we don't have to do that actually. We actually don't, I think we got a $15 super chat, I don't know, Taylor, you want to pop up? Sure. Mrs. from Gail Palval says some debaters have almost interesting points, but I get overwhelmed with embarrassment for these people by their pompous attitudes, smugness, and gleeful malice, which totally destroys any credence and turns them into ideologically religious zealots. Yeah, it's very interesting. I would love to see some of the more interesting arguments that were brought up really gone through and go back and forth. I believe they did like a two-belief episode, which is Jubilee's second channel, but it's with Charlie Kirk and Parker, which is like the least interesting person I wanted to see him talk further with. So that is unfortunate and it's probably just because Parker has a TikTok audience and they wanted to play off of that, that existing. If you'd like to change that category because you think it's unfair, we can do that. That's what's awesome about arbitrary rules is we can decide hormone. I might not know this, but like when the Greeks started the Olympics 2000 years ago, if you're changing something because it's unfair, by definition, it's not arbitrary. But that's okay. Did they have like a bunch of dudes wrestling with women? I don't even think they allowed women to compete. Well, you might be wrong on that, but that kind of proves the point, though, that there was a, and what did we do to allow women? We changed the rules. Right. No, but that by definition, therefore, there is something from body composition, bone mass, lung density, testosterone, and estrogen rates, or endocrinology is different. If you'd say the majority of males in the bimodal distribution graph are going back to that, you can say, hey, we want this level of hormones in this particular category. It's not just about hormones. There are things far beyond hormones. You can get on hormone replacement therapy. And as a man, get your hormones in line completely with a woman's. If you've done that post puberty, you still have male advantages, having gone through puberty. Now, the left's only retort to that would have to be that people need to transition pre-pubility, which is fundamentally not okay. So maybe we don't do that. And maybe your argument doesn't quite make sense because it's not all about hormones. And they try to make it be all about hormones because that's the only place in which they can gain a little bit of ground in this argument because there is such a spectrum to human hormones within the woman's category, within the men's category, and there's a little bit of fluctuation that we're capable of doing when we do hormone replacement therapy. It in no way justifies men being able to compete against women. And we can separate it by hormones. We agree with you that a majority of men are a majority of cis men are a majority. You have to be like 99.9%. I don't know. Ron Rousey could kick my ass. I will say that. No, for sure. That's another thing maybe. Could she kick Conor McGruggers ass? Well, now we're talking about the peaks, right? No, no. She's at the peak though. Oh, cis gender. No, because you're talking about the peaks of two different categories in the same sort of- Right. Because why? She's a cis woman. She's a cis woman. Correct. And she's a cis man. But yes. Correct. And she could kick her tail, right? Yes, I would agree. And cis men and cis women have different hormone levels, don't you? If you put Conor McGregor on hormones and said we're going to wait till they match Ronda Rousey's and then we're going to put them in her ring together or the octagon or whatever and we're going to have them fight, Conor McGregor is kicking her ass. That is the point. Even with hormone replacement therapy, he has gone through male puberty. He has developed his maleness in physical manifestations that transcend hormone replacement therapy. He would still kick her ass and even if you're like, oh well, they're different weight classes or they're different heights. Get a man who's trained the same as Ronda Rousey, who is in the same weight class, the same height, same reach, all these different things. Put him on hormone replacement therapy. Have him fight Ronda Rousey. He's beating Ronda Rousey. You want to change the hormones. We can change the categorization. But you're saying that you want men and women, bar none. And you say that's the most like, well, fair category and we have to allow all women to matter. Well, but again, it's those things don't, so I just want to be clear. So, because I think I'm tracking your argument, is that in the University of Pennsylvania swim team, when Thomas swam against biological women, that was, you're perfectly fine with that. I think as long as we have the categories. Thank you, Mitch. Thanks. Good to meet you. Yeah. You want to get him in? No, no, no, you're fine. You're fine. You're fine. What's your name? Hi. My name is Pripy. Nice to meet you. Go ahead. Pripy. Pripy. You're totally. Yeah. Okay. So I kind of want to go back. To a little earlier, you said that a Parker has lower teeth than you. So would you say? Yeah. No, no, no. I'm fully, I'm fully aware of the joke. But I guess like, again, low blow, but we don't need that. On that point. Yeah. Do you think that like T has to do or testosterone has to do with your manhood? No. Well, yes and no. I mean, if you are looking at typical testosterone estuarine rates of women, they are far different than those of men, but for example, like your testosterone rate goes down when you have children. Okay. For example, when you're a man, that doesn't make you less of a man. Okay. They go down, but like 400 points. Okay. But like when we were talking earlier about like sports, right? And you were saying that the reason why it's unfair for like, like, for example, a trans woman who used to be a man to be like competing in women's sports, you said, at least cited that they have higher testosterone levels. One of about 50 characteristics. Also lung density, their men's hearts are bigger. Okay. We have greater bone, but bone density, muscle mass, tend to be faster, kind of stronger. Yeah. I understand. I mean, you know, I'll come from the hormones during the development process. Correct? No, not necessarily. No. I mean, most of them do. Well, not all of them. So for example, well, most of them do. Okay. Well, if it's most, it's not all. So you can keep working on the hormones thing, which is your only not even winning argument, but it's the only thing where you have a little bit of ground and it doesn't work. Well, you could try to pump a young girl's body with testosterone at eight years old and you can get them stronger. You can not necessarily get them on par with a biological male at puberty. You can not. Right. Okay. But like, because there's something in the coding of our genetics, the coding of our genetics, which is often like controlled by like different, like, I guess, parts of our DNA and also the hormones that are produced that. She can't help it. She can't help it. When you, when you only have one possibly winning pass way, passageway, you have to try to like loop yourself back into it. The effect of coding. It's like a game of snake, literally, more than under chronology, but it's a big part. Because for example, if you just give a kid testosterone that doesn't even get them close to becoming a male or estrogen, give them a female, they might get characteristics that are close to that. Right. Okay. Okay. But I mean, like, there's no perfect image of like, this is what a female looks like. This is what a male looks like. No, but, of course not. Like, we all get our theories like ages, some of us like, like, and also like, for example, like, there are many circumstances where womanhood is just not one thing, right? It's a multitude of experiences. Yes, women get their periods at different ages. You know, who never gets their period? Men. Even the ones that raise their hand and say they're a woman. Periods never come in, buddy. Sure. Every single person. Can you define what womanhood is? That's an interesting question for you. Well, no. I can't define what womanhood is. And the reason why is because it's something that's an individual experience for every single person. Right? Like, my experience is what I have experienced throughout my life is not going to be the same as another woman who may have, like, grown up in a different environment. We have disagreement, but not clarity. I say that being a woman or womanhood is an objective thing. Right. But we are objective outside of one's opinions or experience. So, but are we at the point where we're discussing where this is like not something based on your chromosomes, but something may be based on a construct? Well, no, it also can be objectively witnessed in empirical ways and biological ways in scientific ways. Okay. So, to clarify, we're still discussing whether womanhood is on chromosomes or not. If, if you'd like to discuss that, it's deeper than just chromosomes. Right. Right. I'm just trying to like find exactly what it is to make that right. For example, if we look at spec scans or brain scans of men and women, 98% of the time artificial intelligence can tell you which one is the men and which one is the men, the female. Okay. So, are, are different parts of our brains fire. Okay. So, for men, for men, for example, are amygdala's are not as high working as women. You know what am amygdala is the threat assessment part of your birth. So, obviously, like your birth, so there's a difference between the concept of what sex is, which is a biological aspect and what gender is, which is a social construct. Right. I reject gender completely as a different word is really personal. Okay. So, that's where the debate is. Yes. The existence of gender. Yes, because what you refer to as gender and saying women can be women, it's just people taking on specific traits that they feel like are attributed to femininity, whatever they may be, all across the spectrum, which means it's more about your personality and how you want to represent yourself within society than it has anything to do with actual sex or this socially constructed gender thing that we're, have now been talking about for, I don't know, a few years now really, not, not something that's, you know, really stood the test of time, although they'll say there's a two spirit this and my and that. Gender, gender means personality. Okay. I don't doubt that biological men might have that. How would you, how would you define race on that point? How would I define race? How would you define race? Well, race is a very difficult topic. Okay. Because I think that it's a really important thing to discuss when I come to this. If I draw, if I draw blood, if you have a blood sample of a black individual and a white individual, I can't tell you which one is which. If I have a blood sample of a man and a woman, I can tell you which one is which, just by running very simple elementary blood tests. So for example, if there was a Hispanic or a white, there is no difference in the genetic coding. They're just isn't. Why is it important that someone's, oh, okay. My next claim is that Kamala Harris is a DEI candidate. This should be open and shut this case. Okay. Open and shut. I don't need to leave with my reasons why this is absolutely true. I'm sure he'll do the work for us on that one. A lot of competition, Mason. Yeah, exactly. Good to see you. Good to see you again. I kind of define what a DEI candidate is. I think that you're going to say because she's black and she's a woman, she's appointed because Joe Biden promised that and it's not a testament to her success. Not only that, but also in the, her getting the nomination, the Democrat party, they said repeatedly, we do not want to pass over a black female. Okay. So just those two things, but the first one is stronger. You're right. Joe Biden said, I'm going to put on my vice presidency a black female. Right. Right. So it was quite teary kept. Yeah. And I was like Karen Bass and Kamala Harris. So she was not chosen because of her intellect or her accomplishments or because any of that, it was because she happened to fit a couple of boxes. In fact, Amy Klobuchar, the vetting at the time was that Amy Klobuchar would have been a better VP of Kamala ended up getting it. So it's just a statement of fact that she is there not because of her brilliance or accomplishments, but because of her ethnicity. So Kamala Harris, first and foremost, there are a lot of criticisms that you can give to her on why she wouldn't be an effective president. It shouldn't be because she's a woman or because she's black and it seems to be. Nobody's saying that she's not effective because she is black or because she's a woman and this is so often the argument that you will find yourself in when you're talking to leftists about DEI. Nobody is putting down black people or women. We are saying that is in fact what the left is doing when they feel they need to be pedestalized because of their identity. There are plenty of brilliant, capable black women all over the world. Right? Okay. That if I'm choosing them because they're black women, it invalidates how capable they are and it invalidates how smart they are. So let's not try to call him a racist or sexist and say that he's trying to invalidate the capabilities of black women. He's just saying he shouldn't choose them because they're black women shouldn't be a factor. Me that you're saying that. No, I just want people to understand and agree she didn't earn this. She absolutely does. She has a career where she's been not only a DEA stands for it just to work clear. But like it stands for diversity, I like the meme though, I know what it is. But do you at least admit and acknowledge that when Joe Biden was searching for a VP, he cared more about skin color and a female than the smartest, best person. So the whole conversation, affirmative action with DI, the whole reason why people bring it in is to make this imaginary scenario that there's a super qualified white man who was overpassed by this unqualified, stupid idiot. Well, hold on. But his own, which is such a terrible analogy, said that. Because it's not true. His own team. It's absolutely not true. That's not what it is. Joe Biden did not say I'm going to choose an unqualified person in just a bit. His own team is saying that I'm going to have two qualified people. If one comes from a different experience, it might be better to have a diversity and have a better perception. He said in forms we said at the South Carolina debates that I will pick a black woman as my vice president. And he has not only a history of doing this with his running mate, his VP, he also did it with his Supreme Court nomination. He said I will be picking a black woman and that is how we got Katanji Brown Jackson. Now we can talk about how capable or smart Katanji Brown Jackson is, but it doesn't pull away from the fact that he said I'm picking a black woman and thus, you know, cut off full sections of the world who may or may not have been more qualified for the job. That is a simple fact. Secondly, Amy Klobuchar came out. Is this a random black woman that you've walked off the street? Can I just have a qualified DA general attorney who's had a decorated career leading government position? We got another $50 Super Jats. Yeah, we can read that real quick. Look out in a Bradley says, "Love your show, have a cup of coffee on me." Appreciate it. Expensive coffee, but you know, inflation these days. I know. Not that much of mine. Thank you, Scott. Thank you so much, Scott. You can, but you keep rambling about things that just aren't relevant to what we're talking about. It is relevant. It is relevant. It is relevant. 80 Klobuchar and vetting came across as the more qualified candidate. Why? Because they said Kamala Harris wasn't here. Yeah, I'm not going to let you gaslight me into thinking that you guys like Kamala Harris. Nobody's ever liked Kamala Harris. It's not even on the left of people like Kamala Harris had this gone to primary. She wouldn't have been the candidate. There's no world in which Kamala Harris, if we went through this without all the DEI messing around, Biden stepping down and not running for re-election. There's no way she would be where she is today. And that is even, you know, beyond her being a DEI choice, she is 100 percent a DEI candidate. Very smart, wasn't very bright. That's their own vetting documents. From who? Joe Biden's own vetting documents. So why would he go against that? Because the base of the Democrat Party demands tribal politics and DEI politics over competency. That's completely inaccurate. I stated, Jim Clyburn said, "I will only endorse you in the South Carolina primary if you say that you're going to put a black person, preferably a black female on your ticket with you. Therefore, you winnow the entire universe down and say I'm only going to choose from this criteria." And let's just think more broadly. If you're about to have heart surgery, would you rather have a heart surgeon that's good and excellent knows what he's doing or someone that is a black female? So and being present, it's more important than being a heart surgeon. Aren't you on record saying that you'd be terrified if there was a black pilot? Yeah, let's find your point. Yes, I did say that. Why? What was the full quote? Personally, I don't know. I don't want to expand on that. So this ties into this. United Airlines said that half of all their new hierarchies are going to be black or women and that standards and pursuit of excellence is not going to be taken as seriously as diversity. When I'm flying a plane, I want to know my pilot is there because they're a good pilot, not because they fit some DEI box. Damn it, I wish we could have a better conversation. I'm sorry, man. 100%. He is correct. They just don't like the way it sounds. Yeah, and I'll say like he said, like, would you rather have the qualified heart surgeon or a black woman that kind of makes it sound like it's mutually exclusive when obviously we know it's not. But I think a better way to say it is, would you rather have a heart surgeon who comes out of the pool of possible heart surgeon candidates of 100% or of a black woman would be, what, black people are 13% of the population, so six and a half percent of the population. Would you want your heart surgeon to come out of the candidates from this specific pool or from 100% of the pool being that if they're organized by qualification and the best, like you are very much limiting your chances of having, and leave out the black, believe out the female, just any narrowing it down the pool to that small is going to increase the chances that it's going to be a lesser qualified surgeon or pilot or whatever it may be. So it's just that is the problem with DEI. Yeah. It's just like think of any other category and like think of imagine somebody comes in, you're in the hospital, you're dying or whatever, they're like, okay, we have, we have, you know, some candidates to perform this surgery on you. Thing is, we're only going to allow candidates to have blue eyes. Your surgeon has to have blue eyes. So instead of looking at everybody of all different eye colors, we're going to really hone in on blue eyed surgeons. So once we figure that out, that's the person who's going to perform your surgery. You'd be like, what the hell are you talking about? Look at everybody and find me the best person. But suddenly when we say like black woman, instead of blue eyes, everybody's like, Oh, well, yeah. Yeah. I want, give me the black woman pilot, give me the black woman surgeon. I'm so happy that a black woman's doing my surgery. It's just you. Let's be honest. Okay. It's not even that you feel like you're doing like this really great thing. It's because you pity black people. Let's be honest. Let's be honest. You pity black people. Okay. So let's say that Kamala Harris was a DEI hire as vice president. Do you think she's also a DEI hire as the presidential nominee for the Democratic Party? Potentially. I mean, they decided to go to her almost immediately because she is the VP, but also because she fits some criteria boxes. But let me ask you, you don't think it's because Joe Biden nominated or no, for sure. That's part of it. Of course it is. But let me ask you, what's her greatest achievement or accomplishment? Her greatest achievement or accomplishment? I'd say her greatest achievement or accomplishment is completely destroying the Republican Party within like two weeks of being nominated. Like in the polls, she's just absolutely, huh? Yeah, he's voted off. Bye, Sam. Samantha. Sorry. Sorry. How are you? Nice to see you. What's your name? Amanda. Amanda. So you believe because Kamala is black and a woman. She was chosen for a vice president. It's my own belief. Her own team. Joe Biden said that. Yeah, he said I'm first, because beforehand he said I'm going to choose a black female for vice president. He didn't say I'm going to choose the most gifted or the most talented or the most accomplished. And he's like, I have the most white woman in my cab. I have the most women in my in my cabinet of like any other president. He did it with a catastrophe Brown Jackson. He's done this over and over and over again. This is just a fact. It's not a belief. He said. So he said I'm going to choose a black female. And so by definition, that is DEI. That is not the definition of DEI. By him saying that he was going to choose a black female that could insinuate that he already had Kamala in mind for the role. If he already had Kamala in mind for the role, why would he just say I'm going to pick Kamala Harris? Why you say black female? It's because he had other candidates and it had to be a black woman. So he was looking at multiple black women in the same way he did it for the Supreme Court nomination. He said I'm going to pick a black woman. No way does that insinuate that she's DEI. Well, what is DEI though? DEI. Would be choosing somebody based on their race. No. It's giving people of color the opportunity to be welcomed into spaces in which they typically aren't able to get into. There's never been a female black vice president. And why do you think that is? Well, not why. You just said that's DEI. By definition, she's DEI. Okay. So she represents that diversity within the government. Well, no, but you're saying she got elevated because she was a black female. If that were the case, I'd be the president right now. Do you think this is why we don't have the most capable people making these arguments? I can't even. I don't even need to tell you why what she just said. You guys know. Okay. Do you think Kamala Harris was chosen because of her intelligence? Her qualifications and her intelligence. Really? Wow. If you compare a speech with Kamala, what's her greatest accomplishment? What's her greatest accomplishment? Wow. That's her greatest accomplishment. See, I actually went to UC Berkeley. So I lived there. I don't know if you did. I went around the area. Berkeley is a slum. Berkeley is a slum. Have you stepped into Berkeley? Yes, I have. Do you think Oakland and Berkeley? Have you lived in Berkeley? I've lived in Oakland as well. Do you think? You're basing your information. You think the Bay Area is like a good area in this country? I'm from Vegas, so I'm not from the Bay. Born and raised in Vegas. Higher rates of drugs, homelessness, crime. There's just a ton of stuff. Stores, franchises, companies, and corporations moving out of the area because they can't sustain themselves in the area. Starbucks had stores open in the Bay Area. They were getting so many complaints from employees about safety. And employees not even showing up to work because they felt like they were in harm's way. But they had to close down stores. And you're talking like major corporations that have billions and billions of dollars saying we just cannot take the hit of functioning in these metropolitan areas because of how poorly run they are. Went to UC Berkeley. Just graduated this year. What you're saying, literally, in no way, shape or form makes sense. So I just want to be clear. So you think her overseeing San Francisco becoming the laughingstock of the country. San Francisco is not the laughingstock of the country. If anything, that's Florida, no offense. But hold on, if that is the case, why are millions of people moving to Florida and millions of people leaving California? Because there are cheaper rates there. People are moving to Las Vegas. Las Vegas is changing so whole. It's cheaper because it's a better run state and we don't get money to it. Listen, Northern California is not all Northern California is not the entirety of California. Hold on a second, but there's Southern California. Why is it that so many businesses are leaving San Francisco if she did such a great job lowering crime? Do you know businesses go where things are cheapest to operate? Why are they cheaper because they're better run states? Do you realize that California is one of the most populated states within the U.S.? Show is Texas in California. It's one of the most highly left states also in the United States of America. And yes, there are companies that are moving because of the economy and finding somewhere that is cheaper for them to operate. But there are businesses and major corporations specifically citing safety and crime and shoplifting as reasons that they are leaving these areas. I'm curious what she has to say about that, given that those are things that are directly impacted by who's the DA at the time. Not only that, but land within this state is also very, very, very minimal. So that's... Hold on, you have tons of land. You're one of the biggest states in the country. Yes, it is one of the biggest lands. But do you also take into account the population that's here? Yes, Florida and Texas have a greater combined population than California. And California has more population and more land mass than Florida. Why is it that San Francisco has a declining population? And Miami, Tampa, Orlando have an increasing population. Why does this have to do with DEI? Because she ran San Francisco poorly and she was chosen as a VP because she was a black woman. She didn't run San Francisco poorly. She was the DA of San Francisco. See, she was losing footing on that argument, right? Which is an argument that she logically led herself into. And when she found that she lost her footing in it, what does this have to do with DEI? Even though our conversation about DEI led us to this place, they will constantly try to, like, put themselves in a better position. Instead of admitting, okay, yeah, you got a point there. Let's look at it from a different angle that I have on DEI. San Francisco. So she prosecuted it. And then she became the AG of California where crime went up, homelessness went up, arson went up, kidnapping went up, murder went up. She's not the police. Isn't that the job of the police to get the criminals in? The attorney general. It's such a simplistic view of the world that I have to wonder, like, what are you learning in college? What are you learning? Like, I don't understand. The top cop of the state. Yes. And what did she do to lower crime in California? She convicted those who were guilty. Why did crime go up? Because, as the population increases, and the economy gets worse now, as the economy gets worse, people are becoming more and more desperate, which leads to passive crime. Thank you. Thank you. I'm Amanda. You guys know that TikTok sounds? I just like this. Isn't that her name, Amanda? Hi, Amanda. Amanda, you know, she came in kind of sweet, kind of normal. Mine will be quick. Mine will be really quick. Go ahead. Okay, so real quick, you're saying that the only reason she was elected is because she's black. So that trumps her being a district attorney in all the accomplishments you have. So this is not my words. I'm just going on Joe Biden's own words. Joe Biden said I'm going to preset criteria based on black women, and therefore she met that criteria, and that's why she was selected. No, why? I think he was what he was trying to say is, oh, I'm. Yes. Tell him what Biden was trying to say. Black. She was calling her black. She's not saying he made a public comment. He's not saying I'm doing this because she's black. That's not what she said. He made a public promise before the selection even began and the process began. I will put a black woman on the ticket. So you're saying her being a district attorney doesn't matter. That's not why. I'm saying she did an awful job. I think a failed businessman and making all the comments, weird comments he's made. Hold on a second. That doesn't happen. I'm getting at though. What does that have to do with the FBI? It was not a black woman. She never would have been chosen as vice president. Her record was abysmal. She was a terrible attorney general of California. She had poorly. Load it off quick. Take. I'll be quick. I'm so sorry. She gets the next one. Yeah. Sorry. Yeah. I just have to know. Do you think Tim Walts is a D candidate? Yes. Okay. I just want to see your consistent on that. No. The FBI does not mean black. Tim Walts was only chosen because the Democrat party is doing so poorly with white men that they tried to find a white man that. And how many leftists did I see elevating this point? When Kamala Harris was speculated to be the Democratic nominee and everybody was running with this oh my gosh first female, my gosh first black woman, oh my gosh first indie and all these different things. I saw so many leftists quote tweeting and say, oh well you know her running mate's going to have to be white because we have to even out her blackness, we have to even out the fact that she's a woman. You know it's going to be a white male, they have to have a mediocre white man in order to balance it out. And that is exactly the direction that they went in because you know, logically that's what you would do for the optics of, you know, having your best foot forward with Kamala Harris being at the head of your ticket and they can admit that that is DEI. But as soon as it's happening in the direction of a group of people that they pity, they cannot admit it. And that is the difference between Tim Walts and Kamala Harris. They do not pity Tim Walts because he's a cisgendered heterosexual white man. They pity people like Kamala Harris because she's black or Indian or whatever person of color you want to throw in there and she's a woman. They could put on the ticket. But then also true, Tim Walts is the first white DEI candidate in history. Okay and the Democratic primaries, Kamala Harris was performing incredibly well and she wasn't performing well in the primaries just because she was black. She was performing well in the primaries because during her time as a senator, she spoke incredibly eloquently. Hold on a second, how did she do in the Democrat primaries? She did much better. Her time as a senator, she was very disliked and she was also marked as one of the most progressive senators to ever exist in American politics, which is not particularly liked, you know, even amongst progressives and moderate progressives at that. Her then Amy Klobuchar. She didn't even make it to Iowa. She dropped out months ahead of the first primary. She was super unpopular, not well liked, her campaign fizzled out. So she was... She was popular initially. Yes, and then the more people learned about her, the more realized she was awful. Well, it was mostly because like progressives are really upset about her being a DA, which like can be like, that's a completely different conversation. Why aren't progressives upset about that now? I mean, they are, but... Oh, they are? That's new to me. Everyone's talking about how great of a prosecutor she is. No, progressives are definitely upset about the, like, how, like, the Biden administration has handled, like... Yeah, these are all like, ACAB, fuck 12, fuck the police and then now, she's like, yeah. Her greatest accomplishment was the work she did. She's a prosecutor. The work she did is a DA. Oh, yeah, you deal with me. Trocities and gauda and how, like, they're definitely things that Democrats are upset about. However, that's not the point of this conversation. That's correct. That is not the point, correct. Yeah, that's not the point. What the point is, is that a lot of... We're never going to hear what the point is. Oh, I'm back. It's me. It's me. Okay. It's me. Hi. How are you doing? Great. So, um, you keep saying that Kamala Harris is a DA candidate and I feel like my main fallacy with this argument is that competency can't be objectively determined because we all have subjective definitions of what a competent politician is. Sure, I guess. We can, like, look at outcomes of the work that they've done and pretty much figure out who we feel is most competent, competent. In fact, that's what we do with elections and had Kamala Harris actually been a part of a primary, being a democratic primary to become the nominee, she would not have been chosen. And that would have been a metric and a judgment of her competence that we collectively went through, or at least the Democratic Party would. But my question for you is if Kamala Harris is a DA candidate, why is she beating Trump in the polls right now? We'll see what happens in November. Okay. I don't even need you to explain why that argument doesn't work. But somebody can be somewhere under, like, false pretenses or unjustified pretenses and people can be convinced that it is justifiable and still vote for that person to be in the position that they're in. Okay. But she's currently beating Trump in the polls. So either- If the polls are right, I grant you that. He is incompetent. Or maybe she's a candidate with a big surge. She's doing good. I would caution you being a little, like, this point in the election and getting too cocky because we remember what happened with- I'm not getting cocky. I'm asking you to answer a question. If she is incompetent, how could she beat the president who you said is an amazing president for? She seemed to me how many times she sat down for an interview? What? No. She refuses to talk to the press, refuses to take questions. She's done one sit-down interview in nearly 25 days. I think she did, like, what? She did an 11-minute one recently, but she is dodging- What did they say? She's dodging interviews like Trump is dodging bullets? She asked the filming of this interview, mind you, because I don't know what this will be posted. I think that is a very weird point to me. Why would I count how many times Kamala Harris has had? How would I count how many times the candidate for figurehead and leader of the free world appears in front of the free world for interviews, questions, you know, press opportunities to ask some of other policies? Why would I use that as a judgment in how competent they are and how much I trust this person to be in the position of being a candidate to lead the free world? Why would we care about interviews? Because she refuses to take questions from the press and media. Shouldn't you do that if you're the sitting vice president? He actually did three last Sunday and one today with Meet the Press. So the quality, the qualification of a good president is to take an interview? If you can't take a single question. One of the many qualities of a good president, yes, is to appear in front of the American people and take interviews. Absolutely. But let me ask you this, because it's on you. What's your greatest accomplishment as vice president? As vice president, being the first female all black president, boo, that is hilarious. You couldn't get a more perfect sound bite for Kamala Harris being a DEI candidate than her greatest accomplishment is that she is black and female. And she's here arguing in front of him that she is not a diversity, equity and inclusion candidate. Somebody clicked that. And yet I'm seeing videos on the internet saying this girl ate him up. Make it make sense the math is not mathing. And that's how you get a candidate like Kamala Harris, who is leading in the polls. Because a lot of people are watching this and thinking she's eating him up right now. You never had that right. I got that right. But what's her accomplishment that made people's lives better? I don't know. Vice president, it's not really too much to be honest. Can you name one thing she's done that's good? Right. Okay. No, probably not. Thank you. The inflation reduction action. Oh, really? Did that lower inflation? Yeah, we're experiencing record rates of inflation. But the inflation reduction act. Thank you so much. Thank you so much, K H. What's your name? Brad Brad Brady. Nice to meet you. Brad Brady, that's a name for television idea, 30 seconds on 30 seconds on. I think the best thing I could say about this is you have your opinion. And I can have mine. You believe that Donald Trump was a good president? I maybe don't believe that. You believe that Kamala Harris is a DEI candidate for the position of president. I don't believe that. What I'm getting to is what do you gain from this? If I concede and say that Kamala Harris is a DEI candidate, what do you gain? Because I know what it is. You're baiting us into rage so that you can make money on your TikTok account. You're baiting college students all over the world and to arguing with you over these fallacies, you throw a red herring out there and you're making money from this account. What were-- That makes no sense. What if Charlie turned to Parker who has a very successful TikTok account and said, "I know why you're here. You just want to get clips of you debating me because I'm more famous than you and you're going to blow up on TikTok for clout." It would make no sense to fill that argument out there. Even if it is possible that Charlie is just doing this for views and clout, it's pretty below his audience, I would say, to come and do this. This is kind of a nice thing to be doing on his behalf. And secondly, two things can be true at the same time. I also believe the things that I'm here debating against. It's not some massive grift that I've just dedicated my life and career to to sit and talk to you guys about this. First sitting here and looking stupid. First of all, I don't control this account. I'm a guest here. This is Jubilee Media and they're going to edit it as they see fit. Number one, number two, it needs to be acknowledged that she didn't earn it. She didn't win a Democrat primary. She dropped out in the Democrat primary in 2020. She's never been likable. She's got there simply because of race, not because of competency, not because she's good at her job. And I think that's wrong and needs to be called out. You're bringing up qualitative examples. These are all subjective qualitative examples. Her race, her competency, her dropping out of the elections. These-- That's crazy. I'm talking about the points you've just bought up, multiple qualitative points. And these points can be believed by you and not by me as you believe in a God and I don't. These are qualitative arguments that you're making against me for this. And I can believe differently than you and I think we can agree to disagree. Don't tell me you just came and ran up into this chair to sit across from me and say we agree to disagree. If that's your stance, go sit back in the peanut gallery homeboy and allow somebody here who wants to actually contend with the issue and go back and forth on it rather than saying we agree to disagree. And the point of pointing out that she's a DEI candidate is to disagree with DEI and its implementation into society. And if we can talk about that and get to the factual conclusion, that is, Kamala Harris is a DEI candidate. We need to grapple with the fact that we should not have DEI candidates. Go on. Okay, fine. Perfect. Yes, so he did just actually come up there to say I agree to disagree with you, I guess. I think this is going to take the entire time. Oh, gosh. There he is already up. Parker. You should have cut off for how many times you've come up with the Senate. Okay. Here we go. She's her tie-breaking vote of the Senate. No, no, no. I'm just saying the Senate. Like the Senate is technically DEI in a certain sense for small states. Like Wyoming gets people in Wyoming get a greater vote than in California. Like Rhode Island and Hawaii. I'm giving you an example. California, I get less of a vote than someone who exists in Wyoming. So we're giving people in Wyoming more say than they necessarily should given that they're one individual. So why do you believe in DEI as it relates to how our government is set up? We don't believe in DEI. So because we have 50 states of different sizes and the 50 states each get two representatives to represent the interests of their states, he's arguing that that is DEI. So let me think of unpacking diversity, equity and inclusion in that way. It's not equitable necessarily because giving each state to senators is more about equal opportunity to represent one state as we have 50 of them and two times 50 equals 100 so you get your two representatives. Okay. It's not equity. Okay. It's not diversity because there is no diversity added to the equation in having two different senators for each day represent. You could argue that it's inclusive. Like we're trying to make sure that smaller states have equal representation and therefore including them in a way that they may be excluded if we did it as a representation of their population. But again, he's doing this thing where he finds this like outside example of a time where he can find that you agree with diversity, equity and inclusion. It's the same thing that he did with Charlie on abortion. He's trying to find an outside example where you feel like you've justified abortion. He did it with the trans debate and said, you use God's preferred pronouns. Let me find this outside example where you in some small way support my ideology and then that justifies the larger way in which we've implemented this that is detrimental to society. So I see the trick that he's trying to play. I don't even necessarily agree with the trick that he's trying to play. But even if I grant that having two senators for each state is somehow exercising diversity equity inclusion, it doesn't grant the other malicious ways in which we're using this ideology to move forward as a society. But let's hear him out. I in terms of allowing for people who are black or who are women to be in positions of power that they have not been allowed in historically speaking. So is the Electoral College and the Senate based on race? It's predicated off of diversity, equity and inclusion. Like inclusion of country areas, inclusion of rural areas, inclusion of white men like you. Okay. So you mean like Hawaii? I'm referencing. I'm referencing. You could say smaller states. It's so interesting because when I'm like watching people, I'm really watching their body language when they're specifically when they're being argumentative. And I can see a lot of like pent up energy within Parker and Charlie does have this sometimes when somebody's coming at him like superheated or whatever, I can just feel how bad you must feel with this like pent up rage aggression anger that is like spewing out of you in this moment. That's all I see. Of course, I'm hearing his argument and listening to him and I'm sure he's a smart guy and just ask him. He is a smart guy, but the energy that you give off is not a fun one. And I can't imagine it feels fun to be sitting, thinking these things and feeling these things because the way they're manifesting physically is so anxiety inducing that you must be feeling so much of that internally. Sure. Yeah. Places that have less people in it. So obviously would be able to have so more of a say per individual. So your argument is that the US Senate is a DEI, I could be honest, I've never heard that argument, but I think it's a little silly, but how is it silly? Are you against it? Instead of just saying it's silly? Well, right. So you must feel you must feel not good. Take a nap. Please. Get water hydrate. Okay. First of all, we have on the House representatives is proportional to population. Oh, but the Senate isn't. So it's not DEI. It's not DEI. Yes, it is. But why would you say it's diversity equity inclusions because Wyoming gets two senators. They're their own sovereign state, aren't they? For country areas, for rural areas, equity for rural areas. Right. Right. For smaller states. So let's go back to the federalist papers and the founding fathers. Why was the Senate composed? Why? It's not DEI. Like under your definition, why is it not? Because it's not based on race. And by the way, it's not based on equity and it's not based on inclusion. But it's not based upon different characteristics other than race. Let me finish. Whether or not you're a woman. Let me finish. Let me finish. Why? It's because we are a collection of states. We are not a federal project. So states rights usurp federal. Do you know what the 17th Amendment is? Do you know why the articles of confederation failed? Yes. But what is the 1th Amendment? Because it's had too many rights. It's had too much power. What is it? That's why we specifically adopt the Constitution. Let me make one point. Okay. Which is how did we use to elect senators? It'd be population. No. So we have to elect senators based on state legislatures. So the Senate is an extension of the state legislative bodies. That's not DEI. That's federalism. No. That's the way that our system is set up. You're understanding what I'm saying is DEI. Which is a bottom up citizen led government to allow the states which are first and foremost sovereign. So it goes in this ladder in this country. That's still DEI for the state. Citizen. And for the country areas. No, because it's colorblind. It's not that-- Wait. That's DEI is not only based on race. Hold on a second. That's why this argument is going nowhere. It's actually arguing on different points and arguing from wrong perspectives on both sides because Charlie just pivoted back to its colorblind which DEI is not all about race. And that is a grantable argument on Parker's point. But the whole argument of the Senate is just a trick that he's using to get Charlie Kirk to say sometimes DEI is good. Which it's just not working. Diversity for country, diversity for rural, equity for rural, and inclusion of rural. That's interesting. That's an interesting point. It's not equity. It's not equity. Equity is equal outcome. We're talking about equality is what he really wants to say because it's equal opportunity for the rural areas in our country to be represented by their senators. So diversity is only a race because you associate it with Kamala Harris. Let me ask you a question. Is there a single instance in corporate America where DEI is implemented where diversity means anything other than skin color diversity? So diversity. No, it's not-- Women. Women. Women. Yeah. I mean, there's race. There is sex. There is sexuality in which DEI also applies. That's not the argument to be making if you're Charlie. You should not be trying to really hone in on the race component of it. The race component is even only one factor of Kamala Harris being a DEI candidate. She's also a DEI candidate because she is a woman. If she were lesbian, that would also be a factor in her being a DEI choice as a candidate. And that would be something that they'd be running on. So he shouldn't try to work back to the race angle. He should try to say, yeah, DEI is, you know, an all-encompassing term for a lot of different things. I want to focus on the fact that Kamala Harris is a DEI candidate. Oh. Oh. Diversity or skin color. So skin color, there's gender. You had to move the goal post a little bit because you got destroyed back. Yeah. Now Parker thinks he's won something because Charlie focused in on the wrong point and still Parker, you have not won. No. You've still not beat him out in any way, shape, or form. He misspoke and focused on the wrong path. So I guess you won one point? All right. But there's also-- I'm asking a very simple question. The answer is no because our system of government-- That doesn't mean that's not DEI. Saying that your definition. Saying that your definition is DEI. What was your definition, though? What was your definition? Diversity, equity, inclusion. Diversity doesn't only apply to race. Let me tell you. You're just saying other people defined diversity, equity, inclusion to be based on race. You didn't. No. Let me finish. Because you're saying you didn't earn it. You know who did earn it? South Dakota, North Dakota when they charted themselves into states. Wyoming didn't earn it because they have less than population. Well, they have less than population. To a state. Hold on. Yeah. Such a shame. I would have loved to hear from anybody else in that whole crowd on this topic. But we have one more, it seems. Ooh. He gets to choose. All right. Who really wants to go? I don't want to pick on somebody that doesn't want to get picked up. OK. Um. Hmm. You want to debate? Wait. What is the top of it? Whatever you want. You're the affirmative on the negative. Oh. It's actually that she gets to pick whatever topic she wants. That's crazy. You know how many things you would have to be ready for if you're Charlie. If one person can just pick whatever they want. That's crazy. With ten minutes. I don't want to put you in a spot. You don't want to be in. You sure? Yeah. There it is. OK. I guess the claim I'm making is that affirmative action is constitutional. Why do I feel like somebody gave her that claim? I feel like they gave her a list and she got to pick the claim on that one. And actually the reason I feel that is because doobly asked us for like prompts of like if I did this episode, what would I put? And I do believe that was one of the ones we wrote. So that'd be interesting if they leaned on that. I wanted to talk about affirmative action because we haven't really gotten to it. And it's recently been revoked based on the new Supreme Court ruling. And I firmly believe that affirmative action is constitutional and is the right that certain American citizens deserve. And I just want to hear your thoughts on that. Well, the 14th Amendment allows for equal protection regardless of race and it's a color blind amendment. And the whole idea of affirmative action is to try to give people extra boost based on their skin color or their racial background, which by definition cuts underneath the idea of equal protection. OK. So do you know why the 14th Amendment was founded and the equal protection and equal rights act? No, I don't. Please explain to me like I'm five. Now explain to me like I'm three. To the amendment was a post-Civil War amendment, 14, 15, 16, 17. We're all during reconstruction. So what was it in response to? Slavery. Oh. And who were slaves? Well, that's an important point. So do you think affirmative action will help heal the multi-generational problems of slavery? I do. I really do. Because so let's just talk about the history for a second. History begins in the early 1800s. Earlier. No. Slavery. 1816 is the beginning of slavery. 1619. Oh, yeah, I guess it will be. OK. First slaves come in 1619. I'm not even going to do the obvious of what I could do there. Honest mistake, we'll call that, does an end until 1800s, then we go into Jim Crow law starting in 1877 and black people are not given equal rights until she's setting herself up for failure. Because I already know what the argument is going to be in relation to this. And it's so winning argument. I'm sorry. Officially 1965. Would you agree with that? That's generally the correct telling? Yeah. So, you know, 1960s, 1970s, but just so we're clear that black Americans able to serve in office in the early 1900s, they were able to vote throughout the 1900s. But yes, there were poll taxes. There was Jim Crow laws. There was segregation. Of course there was. And we get to be delusional not to acknowledge those things. OK. So we can acknowledge all of those things. And we also acknowledge, due to the laws under Jim Crow, that black people were significantly hindered from economic advancement. This is a really important question. The data shows not really. It was evil. It was terrible. But black Americans are poor today in 2024 than they were in the 1950s. Yes. Why do you think that it? Good question. So we have the Civil Rights Act. We have more benefits, more government programs, something changed between the 1950s and 2024. So there's two. Really, why do you think that is? Because you're talking about this history of oppression that has led to where we are now, but why were people functioning better under the history of oppression that you are citing? This is a question. Either America got more racist since 1950s to 2024. So like that 70-year period, because black Americans are worse off today per capita than they were. Yeah, I agree with that. Okay, good. Then in the 1950s. Or there's another explanation. And I think the truth is somewhere in the middle, which is I think you would acknowledge that the disappearance of the black father has been the number one driver of black poverty in this country. Now, there are reasons for that that we do. Yeah. What do you think the reasons for that are? Well, culture is one. Would you agree? So actually, let's go back to the foundation of that culture. And you might have used a school prison pipeline, all that stuff. But do at least, can we at least agree that black dads not being around is a bad thing? Anyone's father not being around is a bad thing. No, of course. But 75% of black youth are not raised as a father in the home. It's the highest of any group in the country. It used to be 25% in the 1950s. So it's gone up dramatically in 70 years. Okay. So you are blaming the fact that black people have not been able to achieve economic equality and advancement in this country. Because they've had decreased specifically and solely because of the absence of black parents. Not solely. It is the most primary ingredient reason. So you think it's the absence of black fathers and you think, what else? Public sector's teacher unions that have kept these schools crummy and kids aren't reading and teachers keep getting paid and we don't fire bad teachers. That's a big thing. Okay. So we need more cities and not having enough police and not actually locking up criminals. Let me hear me out. For example, in Chicago, do you know that only half of all murders go solved in the city of Chicago? That doesn't surprise me at all. That's a problem, right? That is a problem. Yeah. So we need more police and more detectives to solve those murders. But I want to hear your points. I'm talking too much. So let's go back a little bit to what you said in the issue of policing. Now starting in the 1980s and continuing onward, there's been a war on drugs. Is this correct? I like the war on drugs. You like the war on drugs. So during the war on drugs, it created an epidemic of mass incarceration specifically of... Hold on. All of you are using drugs. No. Or pedaling drugs. If you don't use drugs, then you don't go to jail, right? No. No. I guess she's going to say people are wrongfully in jail. I guess we'll see how that leads her. I mean, there are people who are wrongfully in jail. There's no doubting that, but what percentage? Not a very high percentage, I'd say. So you believe that the criminal justice system is flawless? No, I never said flawless. She always jumps to the most radical conclusion over the things that he says when he's saying something pretty benign, pretty reasonable, and then she thinks, like he said, the criminal justice system is flawless. That's wild. There's a lot of people in jail that shouldn't be in jail. There's a lot of problems in any system. Okay. So wait, let's hold on that. So you believe that a lot of people who have gone to jail shouldn't be in jail. A small percent. What percent would you say? Five percent. You would say only five percent. Correct. If you have a system of justice, you're going to have scummy prosecutors, you're going to have bad defense attorneys. I have a question. Can I get a Google? What percentage of people currently incarcerated are black? It's way larger than black. Well, it's, hold on. It's way larger than black. I know, but the fact, the fact I'm saying, the fact I'm saying, the fact I'm saying five percent. So that's the point that I'm trying to make. Exactly. Who am I debating? Am I debating here? If your own government is pumping drugs. Yeah. So, okay. You're right, black Americans are in prison far greater than a percentage of the population. So the black Americans, about 13 to 14 percent of the population, but half of all prisoners are black. Exactly. So blacks commit more crimes than whites do. They commit more murders. They commit more arson. Oh, he said something. I don't like the sound of, oh, he said something about the group of people that we pity or they commit more kidnappings. For example, blacks are 13 percent of the population and they commit 58 percent of all the murders. That's not a war on drugs. That's a culture problem. Okay. So let's talk about that culture. Black people have been legislatively subjugated up until 1965. Notice how her argument before was, no, we don't. No, the crime rate is not high. No, we don't do these things. No, there's a lot of wrongful imprisonments and that's why these things happen. Now she's going to pivot and admit that the crime rate is as high as it is, but she's going to say it's white people's fault that it is. Okay. This is the pivot takes place because I used to do the pivoting when I was a leftist. I'll give it. I mean, honestly, it's later, but let's just say 1965. You do not think that 10 generations of legislative subjugation and slavery during that time, I think she wants to cry, to be honest, which sell me at the time. Sell me at that time when I was when I was leftist. She's giving vibes like she wants to cry. 1000 black men, women and children are lynched as the result of race riots in this country. You do not think that these things have a lasting effect. We have had 10 generations of subjugation and four. He's going to say you're going to have to explain why the crime rates have gotten worse. You're going to have to explain why the fatherlessness has gotten worse because when you were living in the subjugation, the legal subjugation of black people, we weren't experiencing these problems. You're going to have to explain that as she can't. Of course they have an impact, but it's more on you to explain why things got worse since the Civil Rights Act. More violent, less fathers around, poorer. Why is that? Because of mass incarceration and the unfair criminalization of black men. But let's just take murders, for example. Why are blacks or 13% of the population and commit 58% of the murders? Why is that? Because people in affluent and wider neighborhoods are not being policed at the same rate. There are more police. I'm talking about dead bodies. We're not talking about policing, we're talking about murders. Why are so many blacks committing murders outside of their population? Okay. Let's take it back to some history. I'm curious for the answer to that question. I'm going to give you one. So let's go to redlining. Okay. Redlining. Redlining. Yes. Is why so many blacks are killing each other? No. Let me finish my claim. Okay. And then you can respond. Is that okay? Okay. We are sustained by the FHA, right, separating black Americans to specifically impoverished and relegated areas of the country. We are incapable of buying homes and putting equity into neighborhoods. I don't know if he's going to make this point, but a lot of redlining was actually self-inflicted. Tom Sol writes about this extensively. Black people would go to black owned banks, black owned businesses and be just as denied as they would at white businesses, and it is, you know, because of cultural practices, because of things people not being willing to take the risk of an investment like that. But I don't know if we'll go there if we'll follow down that path. With lower crime rates and better educational systems, we do not have access to things that would uplift and help our community when you are put in an environment that promotes and reinforces social and economic inequality. You become desperate and are forced to do things that maybe don't align with your values. What you're making, you're making an excuse for a murder. Now, when you have a high -- I know I shot a officer, and that does not align with my personal values. I know I busted a cap in his ass, but that does not align with my personal values. Honestly, it's the generations of redlining. It's Jim Crow. You know, my great-great-grandfather was a slave, and that is why I shot this guy in the head. A concentration of a subjugated people in one area. If you were right, when blacks in America did not have the same rights they had today, they were less murderous, there was less break-ins. Why is that? So, I'm sorry. Are you trying to say that? No, he's saying things. I think he's wording his rebuttal in a way that is, you know, admittedly salacious, and I think purposefully salacious. He's saying blacks instead of black people, he's saying why are blacks so murderous, things like that, and it helps for the soundbite and coming off as saying something really crazy when what you're saying is actually true. And I don't know that you need to adjust your language in order to not come off that way, but it is sort of like a baiting way of talking about these things. Had blacks thrive under subjugation? No, I'm not. I'm asking you the question. The data shows they were actually better in the 1940s. It was bad. It was evil. But what happened? Something changed. They committed less crimes. Maybe they were afraid. I mean, 4,000 black men, women, and children were killed in violent lynchmots. That's your explanation. Racial terror permeated American culture for hundreds of years. Black America is worse than it has been in the last 80 years. The generational psyche of an entire group of people. I'm sure it did. I'm not discounting that. I'm just trying to understand why is it the more social welfare we've done. So we've spent $20 trillion on uplifting black communities, $20 trillion in black Americans are poor. We've done everything that's been asked. You haven't done everything that's been asked. Great society. But it's being asked, subsidized housing, Medicaid, public schooling, subsidized college. We're talking about $20 trillion in spent on the Great Society. And yet black America is poor, more murderous, more dangerous. So there's an explanation. I'm asking you the question. But we are not asking for handouts. We are asking for equity. What does equity mean? What does equity mean? What does equity mean? Do you mean taking other people? Excuse me. It means sharing, which is- You mean taking from other people. Excuse me. It means sharing. We're just forcing you to share, actually. That's so funny. I love the semantic games that we play in debates like this. Very interesting. That is amazing. It's the second time she said something like that. She said, "Kamal Harris is not a Deet. I can't bet." And when he asked what her greatest accomplishment is, she says being black and being a woman in her position. And now she's done this. It's not taking. It's sharing. Something that you guys seem to have a very hard time doing. Sharing. You can explain why black America, and you haven't, is 13% of the population and commits 58% of the murder. Black people have built and founded the society. Okay. Alongside everybody else, baby. Come on. Get in line. Thank you. I was a very smart group. Very opinionated. There were a couple other people. I kind of felt bad for them. They had a lot of strong opinions, but they just weren't ready for prime time. Overall, very good group, very impressive. But it's time to just focus on preventing me from arguing your point, not actually countering the points that you come up with. Sam, we gave you every opportunity to define what a woman is, babe. I am so sorry. Let's not... Maybe we don't give him a one-on-one interview. He often will switch the topic, like do a lot of gish galloping, kind of filibustering to get people. Diddy though. Diddy though. To not be able to make the points that they want to make. And I definitely feel like he did that to me. Charlie's a talented guy. There's a reason why he spoke at the RNC. He's media trained. He's had conversations like this before, and he's built a career on dunking on college students. But for a bunch of liberal students who don't have that same type of media training and who aren't as prepared to be in confrontational formats like this, I thought they did a really good job of articulating their views. Mason was the smartest kid for sure. Parker needs to calm down. Very smart, but kept on changing the topic, but he's got talent. Very annoying though. Smart, but annoying. He definitely gave Charlie a run for his money. Parker ate. See, this is how you know. This is how you can figure out who is intelligent and who is not. You pull these students and ask them, who do they think is the most intelligent among them? And I think the vast majority of them are going to go towards Parker, who was, you know, admittedly not the most intelligent among them. And that is actually a reflection of their own intelligence that they think Parker was the most intelligent among them. Parker ate that down. The longer it was very nasty. She was a very nasty person. She overly personalized it. I honestly don't regret any of the things I said. The only thing I would have taken back is I said at the end, I don't regret any of the things I said. The only thing I regret is as I walked away, I said, I hope your daughter can get away from you. That one was a dig and that was my bad, but honestly, in the case of her being a 10-year-old pregnant and he won't let her get medical help, that's just wild, I can't believe that. I think the group did very great. It's a very hard environment for people to learn in these types of areas, but I think it's best that people get involved in debate and entertainment as it helps people grow and critically think in our society. I thought it was very valuable. I hope people learned something. My name is students. We're able to refine their arguments and hopefully this gets seen by millions of people where they're able to see what side they land on. But yeah, it's not easy just to stand there, be 20 on one, but only at Jubilee Media. There we go. Only at Jubilee Media, guys. We got that down. That was something we made it through. It was interesting. I had a good time. I hope you guys had a good time. I got to see myself in another universe, I guess, in what her name was, Naima. She's going to hate that I say that, she's going to hate that I said that. I've seen her on TikTok ranting about this whole experience and saying that Charlie Smile is creepy or whatever, like she said in the video, so she's getting a name for herself, a small one in the wake of all this. We're going to get into your guys' super chats. We're from you guys on this one. My favorite pin, or not pin, top comment from the Jubilee video, by the way, was the problem with the world is that the smart ones are skeptic while the idiots have all the confidence. Yeah, that is so true. It's nice. It came in. I also had the thought as we were closing, it's like, man, and this is who's voting. You know how you like to say, not everyone needs to vote. Not everybody needs to vote, y'all. This is the world we live in. Okay, IQ was our first super chatter today, says, "Amla, the girl with the dreadlocks is you, as a teenager, isn't it?" Oh, we got that one earlier, but it also said, "Amla, talk to your mom and dad. I think you have a long lost sister out there." She did have a lot of my energy. I don't know that I was that mean, like, maybe I was, maybe I was actually. I definitely had a lot of mean thoughts. I don't know that I said them out loud in the same way that she does, but yeah. Very similar temperament, right, I believe. Tragic. Tragic. I'm into the, it's you at a younger era theory. It kinda is. Silden Borge says, "Abortion is a sacrifice on the altar of convenience." Ooh. Oftentimes. Most of the time. Yeah. Statistically. Yes. Yes. David Dodd says, "Amla, I'm in Nashville with my cousin and her husband. We just got off a pedal tavern. I'm kind of lit. What up? Amalita. What is a pedal tavern? Amalita. A pedal tavern is like a, it's a, what does you call it, like a trolley sort of thing where you're pedaling. Oh, when you drink at the same time. And it's going down the street. And you have a bartender in front of you and you serve and you drink, so it's plain music. I, God, I admit that sounds awful. I can't imagine exercising at the same time as drinking alcohol. Bar cycle. Well, honestly, I've done a bar cycle before from like Santa Monica to Venice and for a friend's birthday. And you don't really have to do that much work because I think they have, it's like propelled by its own way. It's just kind of a. Just as a thing. Got it. Got it. It's, it's an experience. Fair enough. But definitely sounds like Broadway. Have fun. Diva. Celtic Blacksmiths says, Amala, dreadlock girl is you without kindness and love. Alternate Amala's face is different because it's been contorted from years of hatred and equity. Damn. Oh, I guess I'll take it guys. It's fair. Uh, Nicodemus 1984 says, good evening. They have finally genetically created the woke version of Amala in an attempt to have a chance in this debate. Wow. And then it says, fetus and Latin means newborn or childbirth from what I remember from my youth. Cheers to both of you. There you go. I guess it's sticking guys. I am Naima in a different, in a different life. Mm hmm. The multiverse. Yep. Uh, Celtic again says, by the way, I got paperwork for a PO box to ship quarters from yesterday. I'll race you on finishing it. Amala. I have the stakes. You're going to be me. You're going to be me. I'm so sorry. You're going to be me. Get, get us a PO box, set it up and then I will pay you to get me a PO box. Uh, yo, Joe says, I sent this to my liberal friend. She pulled a typical man speaking on women's rights. I hear this point a lot from feminists, but less from us. Yeah, ridiculous. Anybody can speak on anything. So long as you have a functioning brain. And Riz says, hey there, A&T, I'm going to pay for their bus tickets and send them straight to the bleep bleep branch. These people are too stupid. How is that possible? They just have, they're on the journey, guys. They'll get there, I think, or not, and that's okay. Or not. Or not. He also says, I'm going to send that stupid destiny look alike straight to the ranch first. He completely disingenuous and doesn't argue in good faith, red flag. I did notice that a lot of people in the comments were not fans of Parker, but just like speaking over people, interrupting them does not mean you won your argument. And he does seem to think that means that he's won his argument. It's his whole thing. You said it over and over again, he's just setting up these little traps where it's something you're not actually arguing. And then, yeah, trying to like apply that to what you are and conflating it to. He did it every time without fail. Crazy. Arcyon says, I'd like to debate Charlie on capital punishment for pedos. I guess, is he's not Catholic because the Catholic church has banned barred capital punishment. Oh, what is his stance on capital punishment? I don't know what his stance is. Well, he said I would kill them myself in the video. Oh, okay. Gotcha. For pedophiles. Gotcha. Yeah, I don't think he is Catholic. Is he? I don't know. No, he's not Catholic. Just Christian. What I understand. Wes B says, been following your channel, you're brilliant from Wes. Well, thank you. Wes, appreciate that. So nice. Anisha says, I'm technically pro-choice, but feel abortion should not be encouraged the way it is now. One reason. What if we make it illegal with exception of rape? Wouldn't we open men up for false rape accusations? Yeah. I mean, there's always, you know, trades and moves and counter moves to everything that you do. I would be curious to simulate a society and see what, whether or not that, that takes place. You would definitely have women saying they were raped when they weren't. I mean, whether or not that would lead to like actual police reporting and like a false accusation or anything like that, I don't know. That'd be a bit extreme. But I imagine there would be cases where that would take place. Yeah. Yeah. Chris Tetrucker says, I call them evil because I've never seen so many people vehemently argue for the ability to unalive their kids in the womb. 98% of abortions are for no reason, I.e. and convenience of that's evil. Yeah. I don't, I'm not a, you've heard me say this, I don't use the word evil. I mean, you won't typically hear me use that word. I don't think ever, honestly, because I don't, to say something's evil is really to take away like responsibility and logical reasoning and experience that leads us to certain conclusions in my opinion, but that's just a whole other thing. Yeah. Now, evil's kind of like gets off a metaphysical concept. So if you're not religious, it's not kind of, you need to define it in some other way for it to, you know, be functional in real argumentation. So I get it. It doesn't hit for me. Lucy says, guys, have you seen the Giselle Pelico case in France? Yes, I did. I have seen comments about, I think she's a woman who was like drugged by her husband and then essayed by all these like guys that he knew or whatever insane case and the husband should go under the jail and all the men involved. Bye. Thanks. Well, there you go. Lucy, you got to take Timothy says, I'm not even a huge Charlie Kirk fan, but damn. Also for that one kid, I think Harrison, OML on my luck, maybe not every topic has to do with debunking, oh, OMG, not, not every topic has to do with debunking Christianity BFFR. Yeah. It's kept bringing it back because then it's like, yeah, it becomes. And he was kind of taking the bait, I felt like, like, at least for the specific prompts, you're not arguing on religious terms for any of them or you don't need to. Right. So for him to kind of indulge them in that, it's kind of, I don't know, felt like a vested distraction then. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Chris again says, what's a woman, an adult human female and a discussion now to find female? The sex that can bear offspring or produce eggs, they produce over that can be fertilized by sperm. It's not that hard. Yeah. And then of course you're going to be, what about people who can't do that? What about people? It's just never-ending. It's never-ending. The semantic arguments over who what to find a woman. Crow sounds to be strongest. At some point it's like a willful, like, mystification of what is patently obvious. And it's for so as to, like, avoid having to confront the holes in your ideology. Absolutely. Like, that's basically the, they drag you into these, you know, you justify why biology exists and why it's correct and else is, and here's a million different ways to define things and think about it and it just gets exhausting, but what a time to be alive. Jenkins, 73 says, I'm tired of politics driven morals. A real change is personal, legal power won't fix the root issues we failed to teach and connect with people. Yeah. I mean, there's an argument to be made of like these things are largely solved on like the local level and on like more interpersonal, like closer levels in families and like building structures within our communities and that's something to talk about. And then, of course, you expand upon that and because there's so many people and because we live in a society, you have to get into these like legal and political and philosophical arguments for what we do on a larger scale. Yeah. The, the letter of the law has to say one thing or another and, you know, that's determined by representation, we voted for people who write them and stuff like that. And, you know, so the debate is going to be had at one point or I think that's why politics is the, you know, battlefield that it is is because it's where just live and let live. It doesn't. The rubber meets the road, I guess, with that and it is tiresome to give you that. Calhoun says, given all these are all the nuts who screamed follow the science, they sure don't want to follow the science. Yeah. That seemed to be true. There's not a lot of a lot of consistency there, but I guess they'll say they're following their own science. It's a, it's a social science rather than, you know, what we typically believe to be the scientific markers for sex. Uh, K X S S X O X says, uh, Amala, thank you for sitting through that crazy brain rock for us. Been wanting to watch, but just couldn't alone L.O.L. love you guys. My first super chat. Oh, that's so great. I'm glad that you could sit through and experience this with us and it makes you feel less alone in watching these videos. I had a fun time. Yeah. There's a lot of these and I'm like, this feels unwatchable on its own, but I think the, the added discussion and nuance and unpacking is the spoonful of sugar that makes the medicine go down. Definitely. Yeah. Uh, DeAndre Cleaver or De, DeAndre, or yeah, I think that's right. Uh, how is it that someone unalived a pregnant woman, uh, or if someone unalived a pregnant woman, they're charged with double murder, but abortion at 32 weeks is women's rights and not murder. Yeah. I mean, I wonder if the woman was on the way to the abortion clinic. Is it still a double homicide? Is it dependent on how the woman feels about the baby she's carrying? I don't know how that all works, but it is definitely something to think about because it would be a double homicide. Uh, Hannah Taylor says, been watching for a long while now, but have never remembered to tune in for the live. Thank you for making my 20 hour tugboat drive along the east coast more entertaining and distracting from me from getting seasick. Hey, I'm a seasick and it's on a 20 hour boat ride. Sounds awful. Okay. But I hope you're having a good time and I'm glad we can make up for a bit of the time that you're out there. Couple hours. Yeah. I mean, that's, that's intense 20 hours on a tugboat. Yeah. Uh, Alana Maldonado says it, it, it's fair to mention rape and incest are a small percent of abortions, but like D transitioning, not everybody will report these things accurately. Right. Yeah. I mean, it's definitely under reported crime and hard to investigate crime. So there's a lot of things going on there, uh, that would fludge the numbers a little bit. And even if you be charitable towards those numbers and expand beyond the what one and a half percent that they make up of abortions, it's still a very, very small, but something to know and something to talk about as far as exceptions go. Yeah. And what is frustrating that is like most people who are pro life are willing to say, okay, for the sake of argument, let's set those marginal cases to the side and then talk about the actual central issue at hand. And yet most of the arguments that you hear from the opposing side are always the fault to those extreme cases and the legislation also is not limited to the extreme cases or the reasonable cases. There's a hesitance to put any restrictions whatsoever on abortion these days. Right. Um, Omar Velasquez says, uh, the girl in the pink with dreads is Amala in a different universe where she was born, a conservative and turned liberal. There we go. Yeah. It's just the other way. Mm hmm. That's funny. Hobo Jesus says, theory of conspiracy, climate change is a scyop. Get citizens in EVs is a massive data collection effort. Mike's cams, GPS, all the data. Yeah. I mean, I've never really thought about that rabbit hole that that it didn't leave intensely, but I could see there's definitely prose to the whole EV switch and data is one of them. I'm intrigued by argument. I'm not sold. I'm intrigued. Mm hmm. Uh, Turtle Islander says 2017, Kamala sworn first Indian American Senator, 2024, Kamala first black president. That's black. Yeah. I mean, there's a lot of like back and forth of like, huh, which race actually are you or whatever? Of course, I think she leans in different directions or at least the public leans in different directions based on what is the most advantageous foot forward and that's just what we're experiencing right now. Uh, Lucy says, got to go love the show, I'm going to drop the skincare routine. Oh, it's nothing. I literally wash my face with like whatever body wash I have in my shower and throw lotion on it, whatever lotion I have. Uh, and I, this is also lighting guys, lighting makes your skin look way better than it actually. Looks in real life. Ding. Ding. There's the secrets. It helps a lot. And makeup. Duh. Of course. Oh, well, Jesus says the math isn't math thing because of common core math. Oh, there we go. Yeah. They were all subjecting to common core. The, the no student left behind program is what we've got. What's what we're dealing with here? Uh, Kato potato says an artist I like made a political painting. He said Kamala was better as in three years. She didn't say anything mean where Trump did well in office. I got blocked for asking about the two times attempted murders. Hmm. Yeah. I mean, a lot of people make the argument that they don't like Trump because of his rhetoric in his mouth. And I think that if there is a downfall of the Trump campaign, it will be that that even, you know, on both sides of the aisle, people don't like people don't like this. The Japanese. Yep. Uh, Hobo, Jesus again says, send these D E I's to prison and keep that argument. Send them to prison. Bit far. That's related quickly. It did escalate quickly. Um, Timothy W says kind of random, but have you all ever realized there's no slur for bisexual people? I feel really left out. Let's change that. Bike and bag it. You go. She's left. A slur for bisexual people. I think there's no people like a lot of people are like, we don't even think a lot of people don't even think bisexual people even exist. I think that's the greatest slur of all. Just questioning your own existence. Hmm. Hi. They are affirming the binary in the same, you know, acronym has the Q and the TQ plus that doesn't acknowledge a binary. Sorry, bimodal. Okay. Yeah. Yeah. Thanks, Mason. Yeah. Yeah. I looked it up. It's 0.018% of the population has disorder of sexual development or, you know, is intersex as I call it. There you go. So the two modes are 99.99 something. Something. Love that. Love that. Let's see. Yeah, me to seek us says, is it not the government that divides the population? It is not the government that divides the population. It's the culture that divides people to end up living together with those who resemble each other. Hmm. So he's saying like government doesn't divide people. It's culture that divides people to end up living together with those who. They're talking about like redlining like stuff like that, maybe that people naturally gravitate towards. Like from the bottom up, people of similar cultural backgrounds tend to live in the same communities. Yeah. It's not the government that forces that into me, which is largely true. But they're also, you could if you wanted to, I guess. Yeah. This is a big question for a $5 super chat, but Tina Cauken asks, Amla, why do you not believe in God? Oh my gosh. Well, do you, how much time do you have? I can answer in a very short answer. It's not, it's not convincing to me personally, and no argument for that existence has been convincing. I can leave it at that. $5 answer. $5 question. Chae, Chae Lee, Mickle, or Kaylee, Mickle says, really enjoy this episode. Thank you, Amla, for always creating educational yet entertaining content with you at 7/11 in L.A. in August. Great meeting you. Hey, that's so awesome. Nice to meet you too. And I do remember that because I look like a whole ass hobo. I look like I was part of the homeless population here in L.A. when we met. But it was very, very nice meeting you. I always love meeting you guys and when you say hi. So thanks so much. I appreciate that. Tyler McConnell just sends a super chat. No message. It's Tyler. I think defender of faith says, I definitely think that Charlie's use of the word blacks is meant to be a rhetorical cringe creator for people. Yeah, I guess so. I don't know. There's still like, there's this certain like subset of conservatives like Dennis Prager says it all the time. He says blacks instead of black people and he's just grating on the ear. Just say black people. I don't know. Yeah. But Dennis at least has the benefit of being like 70 something years old. Right. Charlie is relatively young and I feel like it's, you know, that is a more dated way of phrasing. Right. It just sounds weird. I'm not going to language police you. Like you can say it doesn't offend me or anything, but just be like the blacks, the gays. It just sounds strange. Yeah. And it sucks because like in that last little exchangey head with the girl, I felt like he was doing a little better job of like, it has helped by her being very slow and how she was speaking, but kind of like calming it down and, you know, still obviously against her, but like being a little more reasonable. But again, like using phraseology like blacks, it's just kind of make your argument land less. Right. And it's not, you know, right, chicken pork adobo says me and my friends are immigrants and started poor by American standards, but they were able to buy new house, new car in just a decade. Hard work pays. Yeah. The American dream is not fully deceased. Okay. There's still plenty of opportunity, which is why people are funneling into the country. Yeah. Well, the ones who have come in legally, but a lot of them have come in illegally, I'm sure work hard and try to live the American dream and, you know, credit where credit to do, although I have some issues with how you came in, but people who have immigrated legally over the years do very well. Like, you know, the African American, you know, literally from Africa who become Americans are outperforming a lot of other demographic groups, just because they're coming here with that attitude and that agency and living it out. So I love seeing immigrants succeed in the U.S. Stephanie Fenceca says YouTube doesn't like certain words I'm trying to super chat, I guess. So I'll just leave it on the live chat. Okay. Gotcha. Yeah. I guess you guys say some, they censor some words. I don't allow you to super chat them. I wonder what the words are, but we can't see them because he can't send them. Yeah. I'm sorry. We had a lot of folks in the chat today. So I didn't catch whatever you said in the live chat, Stephanie, but we appreciate you. Lon's Pons says, I started watching Brett Cooper's content and shortly found your channel. Are there any plans to collab together in the future? We don't have any plans to collaborate with one another, but I'm sure our paths will cross as they do often in this work with what we do. It would be strange if not, you know. Yeah. Arsen says, Hey, Amalek, could you do some more investigating into the Georgia shooter? I believe that you mentioned he might have been trained. I mean, I imagine everything is scrubbed off the internet. I didn't, we didn't know what his identity was, but there was an article that cited that a lot of the driving behind some of his aggravation and his eventual act of shooting up the school was being frustrated with trans acceptance on the issue of trans acceptance. Now, to what degree and for what reason, we do not know. They also said that he was bully for his sexuality. So a lot of going on there. The article said he was gay. I don't know if he had other gender struggles or what was going on there, but I imagine looking into this, how would you find information about somebody who's 14 years old who's social media has been scrubbed in, you know, very difficult thing to investigate. Yeah, especially once the FBI gets ahold of everything and just questions it. Yeah. I think we're done on that. We've seen how that story ends. Yeah. Quadakule says, Amalek, do I have to give my comments on extremism again from one based person to another? This was overall not a useful conversation. Yeah. And we know it's not meant to be, you know, it's just meant to show you the range of opinions that exist and create a little like hot button video, which is good, you know, it's good for what it is Jordan that symbol gray Laurent says the far left in Milwaukee is fighting to defend a racist swastika mural. I never thought I'd see the day people in America celebrate the use of Nazi symbolism. I am so sad. Please expose the story. Who who is doing this? The far left of Milwaukee is supporting a swastika symbol. Yeah, I suppose. I don't know why they want to. I don't know how much time I can put into like these fringe extremists that exist. I'm sure there's like right and left wing crazies that want to protect. I don't know stuff like that. How pervasive is the problem really? My first thought is like, is this like a, you know, Sue Robert Kennedy. So he stays on the ballot to, you know, because it's advantageous for Democrats. Right. So you're actually supporting Robert Kennedy, just like, you know, actually supporting the racist mule. But if there's a racist mural up in Milwaukee, then we can use that to say everyone's racist. All right. Stay up. That's my, that would be my first theory, but it may be that a left wing group is using a swastika, which in that case they're just, you know, cocoon puffs. Crazy. I'll have to look into that. Yeah. I'll tell you about that. Bueno Kitty says, Amala, I think you said you were supposed to do this jubilee surrounded. How do you think you do versus Parker? What's the strategy versus his belligerent technique? Um, I mean, it's, first of all, to not match his energy in any way, which one can be tricked into doing when somebody comes at you really aggressively. You want to like come back at them in that way. So it's just not, it's not allowed on your part, but also to not allow it on theirs to be like, uh, really how Charlie started and like calm down. He shouldn't just cap that energy. And every time Parker was like, gapping at it, go calm down. I can have a discussion with you. It just has to be a discussion before we can move forward. Also I'm secular. So he can't play these like religious games on me. There's not a religious argument in the world that's going to be able to work on me. So I mean, he loses a lot of his ground there. He can try the whole pigeon hole you into one point where you accept this thing. You say you don't accept, but I'm willing to concede ground if the ground makes sense to be conceited and then we can move on from there. So I don't know. He doesn't come off. I can see how he could trick people as coming off as like an effective debater or somebody that's really hard to go up against. But when you see through the veneer of like the anxiety that he just clearly has towards his own intelligence and like thinking about how smart he is, it doesn't really work. So yeah, don't match his energy. Christine Westby says a woman is an adult human female comes from a Norwegian trans woman surprising. Isn't it he he? Comes from a Norwegian trans woman. She's a Norwegian trans woman and is saying a woman is an adult human. It is surprising, you know, but there's so many different individual beliefs out there at least days and just like things, things continue to surprise me every day, you know, 100%. We're glad you're here. Christine, you're welcome. Thanks for vibing with us. Absolutely. Uh, Havidi Babadi says Mattie Healy from the 1975 follows you on Instagram. Please invite him as a guest to the show. You two would have such great conversation. I would love to at some point, uh, interview Mattie Healy. We'll see if that ever happens. I've not invited him yet. Um, but you know, we'll see down the line, got a strike at the right, at the right time on that one. That would be like, uh, that would be awesome. Yeah. We'll love that. I don't think I haven't seen you fangirl very many times. I feel like you might in that case. I will try to, you know, we'll keep it. Yeah, you'd be able to say it. Uh, Stephanie Ponceka again says that people get angry, loud and use personal attacks at best because they're insecure about being wrong at worst, they're immature, and delusional. Mm. Yeah. I mean, there's a lot of, there's a lot of insecurity. Uh, in the video, if you're watching, there's so much insecurity happening and it does sort of like come to the forefront over the actual arguments. And if you can like tone that down a bit, it helps a lot. And then on the flip side, there was that one girl who was just like, I'm going to, I'm going to give up my, my chair now because, uh, don't feel like this one really went my way. Exactly. And then people go like, oh, you lost bubble up, but that's the actual like, that's a good thing to be doing. Yeah. You got the most respect from people because, you know, people can see whether you're being, you know, honest and whether you're trying to cover up insecurity because we all do it. And so if you just own it and, you know, people will respect that. Yeah. Uh, let's see, zero zero nine says Parker in a room full of puppies and a hidden camera would tell all, oh, I'm not sure what you're insinuated, but I'm not going to take further into that. Uh, defender of faith says abortion is always wrong. One circumstances do not magically change the baby in a womb from innocent to not innocent. Yeah, I mean, that there would be plenty of arguments, uh, you know, as to how we deem what is right and wrong in the different ways that people can justify things. But I do see a viewpoint on that. And I don't disagree that it's not, then they're not innocent. Uh, let's see, I had to refresh here. MD says, do you feel, do you still have lib friends and how is it with your lib family? Some friends are so intolerant and distanced from me after knowing I support Trump. Yeah. Now I would never be friends with somebody who was intolerant. I have people who are friends who disagree on varying subjects or we agree on some and not on all. And that's fine. And the same thing with my family. It's all, all chill. It's all good now. Uh, Bree says, hi, Amla, love hearing your thoughts and opinions. I was just curious. What were some of the determining factors that made you want to switch from the left aside to now? I can serve it. Ooh, you should check. I have a lengthy video about that whole process. Um, and I don't know what it's titled, but you can probably find it if you search on my channel where I can speak at length about these things, but it was a lot to do with race and realizing that the left is not as tolerant as it claims to be. And then that was like a rabbit hole that went, that I went very far down to figure out, you know, where I actually lied on all these different issues. Yeah. Yeah. And there's just a speech she gave why I left the left, whatever, WSU, I think. Yeah. Washington University in St. Louis. Um, so you can check that out. That's got like a million views on it. Um, Daily Wire did the thing from Unhappy Liberal to Hopeful Conservative. Yeah. So you can watch that. There's stories out there. Stories out there, guys. So she writes the memoir. I've been trying to get it. All right. Gosh. The new book tour. Yeah. Uh, Breece. Oh, we just read that one. Wama mama. Wama mama. U-A-M-A-M-A. Wama mama. Mm hmm. Right. This is Tara. Anyways, says Teamsters Union just came out saying they support Trump when more unions follow suit. I don't know. I can say. Yeah. Teachers Union. Yeah, definitely not. No damn teachers union is going to come out for it, but I wouldn't be surprised if more follow. Yeah. Yeah. He's, uh, he just took away taxes on overtime. Yeah. So they'll love that. Mm hmm. He's trying now, you know, like fight for workers and stuff like that. So there you go. Hopefully that helps. Um, Christine. Westby again says, as a trans woman, I'm tired of the general is it generalizing that every trans people should understand everything in the LGBT community. Are you guys happy or can admit that more trans people are waking up? What? I'm not following. Uh, I'm really, again, as, as a trans woman, I'm so tired of the generalizing that every trans people should understand everything in the LGBT community. Are you guys happy or can admit that more trans people are waking up? I don't know about the admit thing, but I'm not sure. But I agree that there's a, like, a, a, a ray of different mindsets within the trans community in regard to everything else that exists under the LGBTQ plus tent that now we've created for some, you know, arbitrary reason that is, you know, sexuality and gender and feeling the need to lump that together. So I 100% agree with that. And yeah, I do think more trans people are waking up to that idea that it's not a monolith and that you don't have to agree with everything. Yeah, we see what you get in that. I think so. Uh, give the army again says, what about culture is quite what you said with similar cultures tend to be together, but it is not mandatory. Birds of a feather do flock together. That is, uh, it is the truth and humans are no exception to that age old adage. Yeah. My also says about God, I don't think, I don't believe it exists, but I believe that's something spiritual exists. Yeah. I'm not, I'm neither religious nor, nor spiritual. I just am. It's kind of rare. I felt like, I feel like spiritual, but not religious has been like a thing to be for a while now, but anyway, the defender of faith says culture is not exactly how society changes unless you consider a government as part of the culture. The government plays a large role in enforcing laws, um, via a seemingly arbitrary power crap. I have to think about this. Well, there's so many different arguments. People say like the, the government is downstream of culture, culture is downstream of the government. There's, and it's kind of like, yeah, it's all woven together and everything is reflecting in upon itself and all these different things, tough, tough one, tough one to call, I'd say. Yeah. Quasi Kule says, let me torture Taylor into reading Gen Z nonsense LOL, skibidi toilets, LMAO, Riz, JK based quasi loves y'all so much more based quasi quotes to come. I haven't heard skibidi toilet, but I've heard of everything else. We were doing LOL and LMAO and JK and stuff, like while back, while way back in the day, you don't have, we were dialing up on America online with, you know, instant messenger and stuff like that. Right. You don't have skibidi toilet in Ohio and phantom tax. Yeah. That's all, all new to me. Yep. I was, I sent you a picture the other day, someone tweeted like, these are the four faces of Gen Z pop music or whatever. And I'm like, I think I recognize, I recognize Olivia Rodrigo, I don't, I can't name you one of her songs. I don't know if she's, yeah, I'm using it, but the other ones you had to tell me. That's hilarious. And it was like Sabrina Carpenter, Madison beer, and I forget what the last one was. I don't think it was Addison Ray, but you also sent me a picture of Ray and you're like, I don't know who this girl is. Yeah. It's going viral for some time. Oh, it's not. Keep it up. Yeah. By am. Uh, let's see, Harman is never live, says I am Hindus. Was because not a Nazi symbol, educate yourself for God's sake. Well, it wasn't always the Nazi symbol, but the Nazis appropriated it. It's kind of a, it depends on the context in which it's being utilized. How's that? Yeah. Yeah. I don't know if the OG claim on the swastika, if that is something that you want to get keep. Oh, yeah. Take it, buddy. Um, Nashimoon, Nashimoon Lily says what happened to a Hummity and common sense? Because of humility, maybe it's a Hummity, H U M E T Y. I respect people more for humility and common sense because most smart people and I know are willing to have them and admit when they are wrong. I can't people just say, I don't know. Right. It's a big sign of, uh, intelligence to say, you know, I don't know, or I was wrong and just speed could chill calm, calm down, uh, M S S sound mixer says, I just discovered you and think you are one of the most honest and intelligent people of your generation. Have a coffee on me. Oh, that's so sweet. Thank you. That is so nice. Did you guys just hear my dog howling in the background? They're going to continue right now. They're little puppies and they just learned how to house and now they're doing it all the time and I have neighbors. Oh, I do hear it. Yeah. Uh, they loved it. I'm sure the neighbors love that Caitlin Riley says, I just used a four 99 super chat and didn't chat. So well, thank you, Caitlin, use a four nine super chat. Oh, instead of putting it in the chat, is that what she means? Or it didn't. I guess. Caitlin, I only see this one now, so we appreciate you Caitlin. Aladdin Riz again says, Hey, I'm Tay and Amalita, uh, it'll all that one girl totally looked like a younger time travel version of Amala. I second you diva Don pedal pop. Love the show. Naima. I can't beat the accusations. Can't beat the case. Apparently we look alike, which we do look like, let's be honest. Mm hmm. Uh, Nick Brown. I think this is our last one says inspired by Matt Walsh's documentary. Please check out Ryan Cannell's movie. I'm not racist. Oh, okay. I'll have to check that out. I haven't seen Matt Walsh's either, but I hear people like it. So yeah, I saw it last week is this beat my expectations. There we go. Oh my God. Good. I guess we'll wait for the he's can't get a rotten tomatoes review on it. So I guess we'll see what ends up coming out from the critics. Oh, we did get another super child. Just read this real quick. Defender of faith says, what's your favorite argument for God? I know you don't believe in him, but I could provide you all my favorite arguments against God. You know, I have a lot of people, since all arguments are unconvincing, I don't know that I can give you a favorite unconvincing argument. If that makes sense, sorry, I don't, I don't know that I have. I have one that I could, could, uh, could give you for that, but I have heard, uh, you know, the extent of the, uh, the vast extent of the arguments for, uh, in against the existence of God, you know, the William Lane Cregs of the world and the C.S. Lewis's and, and all the difference debaters, uh, in both the, the atheist realm, which is, you know, a word that if you watch the show, you know, I don't like the word atheist, but, uh, and within the, the Christian realm. So I don't know that I could give you a favorite. Oh, think on that and see if maybe on Friday's show I actually have an answer for you, but I don't know if I can give you a favorite of things that have not swayed me. That makes sense. That's an interesting note to close out. Guys, thank you so much for watching the show today. It was a long one. So if you've stayed from the beginning to the end, thank you for sticking with us and hanging out. If you have any thoughts about all the different topics we discussed in today's episode, drop them in the comments down below after the show. And if you disagree with anything said in this episode, I encourage healthy debate. So let's do get out, but do so respectfully. And if you like this video, like, subscribe, click the notification button to be notified every single time I post a video for you guys and every single time we're live. It's Monday, Wednesday, Friday 1 p.m., Pacific 3 p.m., Central 4 p.m., Eastern APM, Universal Time. And I will see you guys tomorrow with a video about gay storytelling in Hollywood and entertainment. We'll be talking about Agatha. What is it called? Agatha all along or something like that? And insight out to and telling queer stories in Hollywood and in Disney specifically. So keep an eye out for that. Guys, thank you so much for watching and I will see you tomorrow. Bye. [BLANK_AUDIO]
Jubilee hosted a debate pitting prominent conservative pundit Charlie Kirk against 25 liberal college students on abortion, trans women, Kamala Harris, Affirmative Action, and more. Let’s watch and react.
Become a Patron: https://www.patreon.com/AmalaEkpunobi
Join My Discord Server: https://discord.gg/Ehk8Ud4H6T
Watch or Listen on Spotify: https://spoti.fi/3LNbCV1
Apple Podcasts: https://apple.co/48k9yNU
Follow Me on Social Media:
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/theamalaekpunobi
TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@amalaekpunobi
X: https://twitter.com/amalaekpunobi
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TheAmalaEkpunobi/