Episode 136

Perhaps more so now than any point in our lives, we come across something that evokes deep consternation or shock, and it brings us to a sobering resignation that this world has gone bonkers. We are starting a new series to document those very things that we’ve encountered at RBP. It may be something old, or perhaps it’s fresh off the presses… but one thing is for sure: it’s absolutely bonkers! Far be it from us to bring these up to encourage pessimism, however. Rather, our desire is to remind the believer that this world is not our home, and the time we have to win the lost is short. Join us as we begin this series, and feel free to share something you encountered that reminds you this world has gone bonkers!

[Bruce/Caitlyn Jenner]

Sandra, I’m here to make a statement today right here on Fox News. Are you ready for this statement?

[Sandra – Fox News]

All right. OK.

[Bruce/Caitlyn Jenner]

There there is a difference between men and women, and that is a good thing.

[Jay]

Thank you for tuning in to the Removing Barriers podcast. I’m Jay and I’m MCG, and we’re attempting to remove barriers so we can all have a clear view of the cross.

[MCG]

This is episode 136 of the Removing Barriers Podcast, and in this episode, we are starting a new series. We are calling. This world has gone bonkers. A series in which we will be looking at the news, past and present, and offer our commentary in it. These will be videos and articles where we have some opinions but may not have enough to make a full episode on it alone. In this first installment of this series, we both have chosen 2 news articles and will be discussed there.

[Jay]

Hi, this is Jay. MCG and I would like for you to help us remove barriers by going to removingbarriers.net and subscribing to receive all things removing barriers. If you’d like to take your efforts a bit further and help us keep the mics on, consider donating at removing barriers.net/donate. Removing Barriers, a clear view of the cross.

[MCG]

Alright, Jay, what is the first article you would like to discuss in this series? This world has gone bonkers.

[Jay]

OK, the first article that I would like to discuss is an article written by a Harvard professor who wants a presumptive ban on home schooling. Now this article was written in 2020 by Elizabeth. Bartholet and. I thought that this article was bonkers because she paints homeschooling as a very dangerous act and that educating our children is something that you can’t trust parents to do. And all of the educational, social, and spiritual needs of the. Child are to be met by the collective in a school. Setting and to me, that’s just bonkers.

[MCG]

Yeah, so bonkers to me. Do you have any exert of that article?

[Jay]

Let me read the abstract to you here. The article describes the rapidly growing home schooling phenomenon and the threat it poses to children and society. The threat it poses to children and society. Oh, before I continue reading this abstract, keep in mind that the pandemic. Had just gotten into full swing and schools were shut down. Many, many, many families began home. Schooling, whether they took their children completely out of the public school system or if they were simply using the public school curriculum while they were schooling at home. Either way, the number of families that turned to home schooling at the onset of the pandemic and throughout was exploding at this time. So this article describes the rapidly growing. Home schooling phenomenon and the threat it poses to children and society, homeschooling activists have in recent decades largely succeeded in their deregulation campaign, overwhelming legislators with aggressive advocacy. As a result, parents can now keep their children at home in the name of home schooling, free from any real scrutiny as to whether or how they are educating their children. Many home school precisely because they want to isolate their children from ideas and values central to public education and. To our democracy, many promote racial segregation and female subservience. Many question science. Many are determined to keep their children from exposure to views that might enable autonomous choice about their future lives. This article calls for a radical transformation in the homeschooling regime and a related rethinking of child rights and reframing of constitutional doctrine. It recommends A presumptive ban on home schooling with the burden on parents to demonstrate justification. For permission to homeschool.

[MCG]

So therefore, there’s several things. The one the kids belongs to the government, to the parents, they’re not responsible for their kids. Education Tree is a backhanded attacking Christians. Should I go?

[Jay]

On where does it even end? The words that she uses to describe or yes, I mean she’s not alone in this particular article, but generally she is the sole author. But she cites other people, but the idea is that this is a regime, and the homeschooling advocates are these aggressive. We’re gonna get them type people, and it’s really just people. Who want to teach their kids at home? And so when you know when she says things like let me find it here where she says. Ohh, parents want to keep their children at home in the name of home schooling, free from any real scrutiny as to whether or how they’re educating their children. OK, so the reason why that’s not true and I don’t know if she simply doesn’t know what the home schooling laws are in all the states, because it’s not a blanket law across the country. This country has its own each state. Yes, each state, thank you has its own laws in terms of how home schooling is to be conducted. But there are very few states where you can home school without any. Money from the government? I’m not saying there aren’t any. I’m just saying there are very few. And she says that any real scrutiny as to whether they’re educating their children or how they’re educating their children. So the implication there is that there is a method that is deemed acceptable for educating children. So if you are let’s say for example an unseen. Cooler and that’s how you choose to educate your children, I would imagine in her eyes. Is that not OK or what? If you are deciding to use an explicitly religious curriculum, does that not fall within the bracket of how acceptable means of how you educate your children? The statement begs the question if there is going to be a standard. Of whether or how you educate your children, who is to set that standard.

[MCG]

Yeah, that’s exactly what it is. You know, Ken Ham says that when they take the Bible out of the school, they say that they took religion out of the school. But what they actually did was replaced Christianity with their own world religion. Religion is always going to be in the school. It’s just which one.

[Jay]

Right. We see that today. I used to be one of those people that would look at, you know, Christians that would warn about taking prayer to school and how that’s a downward trajectory and how, if you allow this sin, then it’s going to lead to these other sins. Was one of those that was skeptical be like? Oh, come on, you guys are. No, you’re alarmist. No, it’s not gonna be that bad. And I am very glad to say I will eat crow and I will gladly take my words back and say that I was wrong because the things that we’re seeing in our public school systems, in our classrooms and on social media that teachers are sharing what they’re doing in their classroom, on social media, even in my lifetime. I am blown away, blown away by how quickly the degradation has been. She says here that many homeschool precisely because they want to isolate their children from ideas and values that are central to public education and to our democracy. You know, on one hand I wanna say, yeah, yeah.

[MCG]

Of course.

[Jay]

And on the other, yeah. And on the other hand, I wanna say no, that’s not quite what we’re doing. It’s like when you’re gardening, typically if you don’t live in an area that has great weather. You typically start your seeds inside protected in a greenhouse. Give the seeds a fighting chance where they don’t have to battle weather or the scavenging crow or birds or other critters they have a chance to grow. Undisturbed and the way they were supposed to in a greenhouse in a protected environment, and then when they’re ready and when they’re sturdy, when they’ve constituted themselves, you can transplant them out into the garden. Well, in many ways, raising our children is the same way. We wouldn’t just throw them to the wolves and throw them to the world and allow the world to raise them anyhow we want to. Protect them from the plethora of evil influences that exist in the world that, as we described in the last podcast that they are absolutely out to get our children and we need to protect them, and that’s OK. But according to Miss Bartlett, it’s not OK.

[MCG]

Yeah, definitely. I agree. So I have article here and this is from Fox News. The title of it is D transition teen sues Kaiser Permanente for performing double maximum on her at 13 intentional fraud.

[Jay]

She’s saying that’s intentional fraud, that they would perform the double. Checking on her. Let’s go. Right. OK.

[MCG]

Do you transition teenager Leila Jane is suing Permanente Medical Group and Kaiser Foundation hospitals, the medical provider who performed a double mastectomy on her when she was just 13 year. Role after beginning to identify as transgender 2 years before now 18 years old, Jane is accusing the hospital system of intentional fraud and concealment involving her gender transition, alleging the doctor’s push her into the procedure and characterize her gender transition as the only way to cheat her pre-existing. Mental health problems arisen nowadays more, but I’m going to stop for a. Little bit because it’s interesting here that now she’s detransitioning. She’s calling it a mental disorder, which we all know. Gender dysphoria is a mental disorder. Whether or not the LGBTQIA plus community want to admit it, but also interesting here, she’s still in the hospital, and I can’t help to beg and ask. The question where were her parents? If she should be suing anybody, in my opinion, should be her parents, because the editor said she started transitioning at 11 and she did a double Mexican at 13. As far as I know, and I think this is probably the entire Western world, is this way 11 year old or 13 year old cannot legally determine these things for herself or herself. So her parents gave the hospital permission. To mutilate their daughter’s body and their daughter now become of age, is still in the hospital now. I do believe that it should be illegal for doctors to mutilate children bodies. However, it’s not illegal today, and it wasn’t illegal when she did this, so I don’t know what she really has in the hospital. You’re going to cause them to say, hey, yeah, this was fraud. I think she’s just showing in the body. Sadly, she should be showing her parents because they’re the one who signed and gave permission and whatever for this.

[Jay]

I agree with you to a point. I am one that believes that doctors should be held liable for things like this personal note. I remember having been pregnant but miscarried, and my body had not yet gone through the process of delivering the children, and the option was given to me to perform what’s called a D&C. Which is a process in which they insert tools into the uterus to scrape everything. Out it’s a surgical procedure and there is a very strong push to get that done. I was not comfortable with that idea. I’m not comfortable with surgery altogether, especially the two instances where surgery was recommended in my life. There always seem to be this push to. Get the surgery. Because from a practical stance, surgeons have a very limited opportunity to practice their craft. So when there’s an opportunity to do it, they’re going to jump on it. And so they have the incentive to push and get those things done. And so I remember sitting down with the obstetrician and asking a very pointed question on what would happen. If I did not go with the procedure and he just kind of hemmed in hard and just kind of said, well, you know, do you really want to be pregnant but not and do you? So there was no real medical reason to hurry up and push for the operation, except that he was pushing for it as well. And I think perhaps in this instance it’s possible that if the doctor sees that. You’ve got a child who’s confused and thinks that they want this surgery, that they have no capacity. Or at least very little capacity to see how it’s going to affect them. 510, fifteen, 20-30 years down the road. This is a child we’re talking about here. So you’ve got a confused child and you’ve got parents who are allowing the child to parent, and they’re just following along. Well, the doctor is going to jump on that opportunity and go ahead and do that, which I think is unethical, which is why I think that. You should be able to take a lawsuit to them if for nothing else to let them know that they should think twice about being so gung ho on jumping on this gender transition sort of affirming surgery. Although I do think that her parents absolutely. I will say 99.7% of the blame here for sure. The doctor gets the other 0.03%.

[MCG]

Yeah, but I can’t say I fully agree with your saying because again, we can talk about ex post de facto laws, because now you’re talking about it was legal then and then is now illegal, which is not, even though that’s one thing. So you can’t go back. And sue someone for doing a legal action that was legal then, right? But at the same time, should the government intervene in this and say hey? You have to be 18 to do certain things. I believe so, and some states like Florida and I think Tennessee may have, you know, draft those laws that you can’t transition a child, but. Like California, I don’t know exactly where this young lady was, but have allowed parents to mutilate their children at her early age. So you can see the doctor is unethical, but unethical doesn’t mean illegal. You can see the doctor should not have done. This I can’t. Even I get it. He’s morally wrong as well, and I would agree with that. But I’m just looking at this from a pure legal standpoint because she’s suing. She’s not coming, as I said this.

[Jay]

OK, from a pure legal standpoint, I can see what you’re saying.

[MCG]

She right. She’s not coming out and said this was immoral. This was unethical. She basically said this was malpractice and I just can’t agree with that. Even though again I’m not getting on on her, I’m very much sympathetic of her because at 13 she needed parental guide. And not a medical doctor to pushing stuff on her and hospital be pushing stuff on her. She needed parental guidance at that age. Parents that would say no. Hey, let’s deal with this a different way.

[Jay]

How do we know that the hospital didn’t pressure the parents?

[MCG]

They probably did and let me read the rest now. 18 years old. Jane is accusing the hospital system of intentional fraud and concealment involving her gender. Transition alleging that doctors push her into the procedure and characterize her gender transition as the only way to treat her pre-existing mental problems. I don’t think I should have been allowed to change my sex before I was legally able to have sex, Jane told Fox News Laura Ingraham last Thursday. I don’t think I’m better off for the experience. And I think transition just completely added fuel to the fire. That was my pre-existing condition, Jane said she previously struggled with mental health, including suicidal ideation, before deciding to transition going into other. Lesson her attorney alleged James caregiver failed to administer the necessary mental health treatment before performing a double mastectomy and never inform her that 80 to 90% of teens eager to transition, desist from doing so. Informed consent was missing here, the attorney said. It is impossible for a child to give. Informed consent. And it is impossible for parents who are not fully informed and with a child that was not properly cheated, cannot also give consent. So the attorney is saying, hey, the parent was ill informed and the child couldn’t give consent. Again, I said put the parents. I’m sorry, Jane lawsuit. According to the report from the blaze, alleged doctors warn her of an increased risk of suicide if she failed to transition to male, adding that they gave her parents a binary option of living with a live son. Or suffering the consequences of having a dead daughter.

[Jay]

Listen, This is why I think that they need to go after the doctors as well. Yes, the parent. But in the last podcast we talked about how doctors have a privileged position in people’s lives and that people trust them so much with very, very significant and important decisions that they have to make with their bodies. And in situations that most other professionals cannot help them, typically, if your doctor says something to you, you’re going to regard it very seriously. It’s going to have weight, so if your physician is saying to you now this isn’t just your physician, right, these. Surgeons and doctors that provide so-called gender affirming care have an evil army behind them under the label of W Path, the World Professional Association for Transgender Health and W Path is made-up of other different professional associations for transgender health. There’s Asia path, there’s US path and. All of these different paths come together to make up W path and W path, aggressively lobbying and aggressively working to change medical, societal, and legislative dispositions and attitudes toward. The so-called gender affirming surgery or gender affirming care, and I put that in air quotes because it’s not care, it is mutilation and it is an exploitation of people who are having serious mental issues. And so when you have an army of professionals. Behind you allowing and pushing for this kind of so-called care and treatment, I think that. The only way to hurt them and to fight back is with the law ensuing and hurting them in their pockets and in their public perceptions. Where it hurts. Otherwise they will be able to continue this terrible thing with impunity. They will continue doing it without a care in the world, because no one will hold their feet to the fire. The W path just to. Once both US path and W Path confirmed that so-called gender affirming Healthcare is not experimental and they condemned the recent string of legislation that asserts that it is experimental. the United States Professional Association for Transgender Health, that’s US path and W Path denounces the emergency regulation. Halting gender affirming healthcare for transgender and gender diverse children and adolescents issued by the Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey, as lacking scientific grounding, and it goes on to explain why. They they feel that this is the case. We’re not talking about adults. They literally said children and adolescents. So these people think that they can just get a so-called professional association together. And because they’re so official sounding, and we’re doctors and we’re who, huh? We’re in this different class than you. Then we can push these things, and someone needs to stick it to them. And let them know that they can’t do that. And I think legislation and also AG’s like Andrew Bailey and Missouri are fighting back. That’s exactly what needs to happen.

[MCG]

And I agree with you on that front is that I think this is a political. Issue and not necessarily a legal issue. The problem I have with it being legally allowed for detransition. People to sue the doctors who did the transition is that where does it end? Why would it that someone who have? You know, the Bible says the love of money, the root of all evil. What would stop someone from going to a doctor say, hey, I I’m identifying as a woman now and I well, let’s say a woman say she’s identified as a man now. And they did a double mastectomy. And her, and then a year later, she turned on us to the doctor because I had mental health issues and the doctor didn’t help me remember. Matt Walsh had his producer called his hospital and just say, hey, I’m feeling like I want to be a woman and they immediately push right through for him to have surgery. Well, yeah, that should be illegal, but unfortunately it’s not because it’s so easy to do these things. What will stop someone who want to gain $10 million in a lawsuit from simply going through a transition, losing to break? To get $10 million, tons of people probably would do that. So I see what you’re saying. I think definitely on a moral issue, ethical issue. I will agree it is definitely wrong. Politicians should make these things illegal. As I said before, some are actually doing that. But I’m sympathetic to this girl because she was 13. That should be at least. That should be illegal before 18, but sadly it’s not. This will have gone bonkers.

[Jay]

The fact that we’re even having this conversation is bonkers, officially.

[MCG]

So sadly it’s not, but I don’t think lawsuits should be the answer, because where does it end? Again, these, that’s are evil, but.

[Jay]

Let me push.

[MCG]

I don’t know. Well, let me say this. Let me say this though. Also, I think again, I put as you said, I put my charity you say 97.

[Jay]

Let me push. Back just one more time.

[MCG]

Point whatever I. Put probably 99.999% on appearance. The appearance is the one here to be blamed big time the doctors. If I want to put any blame on them. If their parents had said no, the doctors could have done nothing.

[Jay]

So I say 99.7%, but the other point did I say .07 I can’t remember. Anyway, the point 3%, let’s say because I understand your argument in terms of just looking at it purely legally. But the reason I can’t get behind that is because I understand that we’re a nation of laws and we’re a nation, that orals, we agree to follow the law and obey the law. This is an instance where the evil is so. Full, incredibly shocking that the foot needs to come down somewhere. This is an amalgamation, not an amalgamation. It’s a it’s a confederacy of politicians. Medical professionals, psychiatrists and things of that sort that have woven ideologies together in order to provide surgery for mental health issues. Where surgery has never been prescribed to treat a mental health issue, from my knowledge ever, this is completely new and completely experimental, and it’s a conspiracy of professionals that have come together to tell the average American we know better than. You shut up and do as you’re told, which is pretty much what is happening here. This is why in a state like California, you can transition your kid without letting the other parent know, and the other parent has no rights to try and stop what’s going on.

[MCG]

California is a different country, though.

[Jay]

Yes, that is, and that’s bonkers.

[MCG]

So true, but.

[Jay]

California is bonkers. But This is why I’m very happy. That she’s at least attempting to sue, because if we just lay down and take it, they will continue without fear of any sort of liability repercussions. They will continue with impunity. They will just they will continue to do it because of the financial incentive and other incentives, of course that are ideologically.

[MCG]

It’s my last point before I read the last two paragraph that I’m going to read of this article. I see what you’re saying. But the reason why I disagree? Because the same argument can be used against gun manufacturers. When a when a when a mass shooting happened.

[Jay]

I don’t follow.

[MCG]

Instead of blaming the person who pulled the trigger, who had the gun and pull the trigger, they said, hey, we need to ban the manufacturing. The sale of this particular gun, are they going to sue the gun manufacturer? So let’s say Smith and Weston created their version of the popular AR15. Someone bought it and go, and God forbid shoot up some people. And they’re going through Smith and Wesson. That, to me is the same thing. You’re shifting the blame from the people who should really be blamed. The doctor to me, hate to put it this way, but is the manufacturer here? And the parents are the one who had the gun. I don’t feel like the parents are the one to be blamed. Parent parent. That’s what you’re there for. You know, when she turned 18, she wants to want to do it. You wash your hands and you get on your knees and pray and make the chips fall where they lie, but once they’re. Legally under your care and under your roof, you are the parent. So I’m sorry again. I’m sympathetic to her because I know she went through pretty hard time here, but I don’t know. I disagree with the doctors. I think the doctors are more really corrupt. But if I was on the jury for this, I couldn’t see that I award her any money because it would be overwhelmingly. Because in my mind, where were your parents? Why did they sign this? Go and Sue your parent. She also stated that she suffered from a plethora of issues, including body dysmorphia, anxiety, depression and cubical struggles. According to a letter from her attorneys, Jay lawsuit noted a series of health struggles brought on by the permanent irreversible mutilation, including inability to breastfeed, increased likelihood of inability to conceive. And endocrine problems. Again, I am very, very, very sorry that this young lady had to go. Through this thing. But of course, now she’s using terms like mutilation, which it is obviously. I guess a 13 year old and not thinking about having kids and being able to breastfeed at 13. That’s one of the reasons why children should not be allowed because they can’t see past their nose. You know, children is now what can you do for me now rather than what can you do for me five years down the road? So again, this falls back on the parents. I’m sorry, the doctors should not have been allowed to do it. Since the government have allowed doctors to do this, it goes under parents to say no. You’re listening to the removing by risk podcast. We have started a new series. This world has gone on course. We’ll be right back.

[Jay]

This is the removing barriers podcast. If the podcast or the blog were a blessing to you, leave us a rating and a review on your favorite podcast platform. And don’t forget to share the podcast with your friends, removing barriers, a clear view of the cross. Hi, this is Jay MC G and I would like for you to help us remove barriers by going to removing. Barriers.net and subscribing to receive all things, removing barriers. If you’d like to take your efforts a bit further and help us keep the mics on, consider donating at removing barriers.net/donate, removing barriers. A clearview of the cross.

[MCG]

All right, Jay. So if you think that was bonkers, I don’t know what you going to think about this one, but there’s a private Christian School in Vermont. That was banned from participating in sports because they refused to play. Against a team that has a transgendered teammate on it. So now this is on Fox News. So Fox News is reporting on. And they brought in. A mystery guest to discuss this sad phenomenon. I’m going to play the video, but here, here we go.

[Sandra – Fox News]

A private Christian School in Vermont banned from playing sports in the state. The Vermont Principals Association accusing mid Vermont Christian School of violating gender awareness policies after the girls basketball team refused to play a team with a transgender player. Let’s bring in Caitlin Jenner on this former California gubernatorial candidate at Fox News. Contributor Caitlin, due to the breaking news.

[MCG]

Alright, I’m going to pause it there because. Caitlyn Jenner. If you happen to not know who Caitlyn Jenner is name before he transitioned to a woman was Bruce Jenner. Is this the epitome of situation on irony?

[Jay]

They brought in a so-called transgender like from male. To female, although not really because he’s not female. In order to discuss. A Christian School being banned for not playing a team with a transgender teammate? Yep, this is bonkers.

[MCG]

The funny thing is that I’m probably should be making joke, but The funny thing is when I was listening, because the other time when I’m listening to like YouTube videos, I’m not actually watching them. I’m just listening to them. So when the person. And now they’re gonna bring in Caitlyn Jenner, even though I mentally knew who that was for some reason, because I wasn’t watching it. I was expecting a female voice. So when you start talking. I immediately like kind of just look up and like what’s going on here. But anyway, if you don’t know who Bruce Jenner is or Bruce Slash Caitlyn Jenner is, he’s a former gold medal Olympian. The Patriarch of the Jenner Kardashian clan, and he transitioned some time in 2015, and he also won several awards for his courage. Quote UN quote. Other woman, including the Arthur Ashe Courage Award from ESPN at the SP. And the Glamour magazine woman of the year. So this is the person that Fox News brought in to talk about a private Christian School being banned because they refused to play against a team that had a transition girl. All right, here’s the rest of it.

[Sandra – Fox News]

California gubernatorial candidate at Fox News contributor Caitlin, due to the breaking news. Just this hour, we’re short on time but want to get your response to this in this moment of so many schools, teams, athletes having to make big decisions over how this is handled. Your reaction to this.

[Bruce/Caitlyn Jenner]

Well that. That’s a big problem. First of all, I’ve been very consistent on this subject. I’ve always tried to protect women in sports. I mean, from the Leah Thomas case, we won that battle. That’s a good thing. But these stories, they’re all kind of the same, but with a little bit of A twist. What’s happened is this the radical left and their radical gender ideology have really tried to over the years, blur that line between men and women. And it’s infectious not only with transgender issues, but everything. And I just don’t feel like that’s a good thing. And Sandra, I’m here to make a statement today right here on Fox News. Are you ready for this statement?

[Sandra – Fox News]

All right. OK.

[Bruce/Caitlyn Jenner]

There there is a difference between men and women, and that is a good thing. We should honor that and. Caitlin, meaning.

[Sandra – Fox News]

What’s happening?

[Bruce/Caitlyn Jenner]

You know, it’s funny.

[Sandra – Fox News]

Always give it to us straight.

[Bruce/Caitlyn Jenner]

The radical.

[Sandra – Fox News]

Up and this.

[Bruce/Caitlyn Jenner]

The radical left is just not.

[Sandra – Fox News]

Oh, you have used the word that they have hijacked. Well, transgender in this country, the transgenders in this country, 94 students affected by this, it’s a big deal. And we’re watching all these developments, Caitlin, because there are many of them out there. I know I’ve got. 5 seconds. Caitlin, go ahead.

[Bruce/Caitlyn Jenner]

Alright, first of all, I I don’t like what the the league did in banning those girls. They made a political decision for one person. Yeah. And they had you just said 94 girls were affected over one person. That’s wrong. They should be ashamed of themselves.

[Sandra – Fox News]

That’s important. That’s important. Caitlin, thank you so much. We’ll have you back soon.

[MCG]

And The thing is, I don’t disagree with his analysis you though, but the the irony, the situational irony here is Bruce.

[Jay]

Yeah, yeah.

[MCG]

Then you have contributed big time, if not more than anyone else. Maybe except for Dylan Mulvaney at this point. But between you and Dylan Mulvaney, are the two superstars of transgender woman from male to female. So if you’re upset and sad about it. Start identifying as a man again and tell the world you were wrong. Use your fame and fortune to and I was like a rant and fox, but a lot of people think future Fox is so good and **** is. Yeah, right.

[Jay]

They are not. This is why we had that podcast that warned Christians never to confuse your conservatism with Christianity because at this point, conservatism is just progressivism, as Michael Mattis has progressivism going the speed limit, the fact that a conservative news organization would promote. Anything transgender by having a transgender. Other person on there as a pundit or commentator, I mean the lack of self-awareness on Fox News’s part is incredible. That is bonkers. This is one of the reasons why I say people that are conservative. That are maybe not even principally conservative just are conservative in light of everything happening in the world today, the left has gone so bonkers that anything to the right of Mao is considered radical leftist or.

[MCG]

The right of Mao. Wow.

[Jay]

Anything to the right of Mao is considered to be alt right. The left has gone crazy. Right. And that’s the only reason why people that are in the center or that have traditionally been in the center are considered alt, right, and the right wing now. But Christians need to be very careful with. Media that they consume just because it’s conservative doesn’t mean that it’s good or holy or right. This is Fox News giving a platform to and validating A transgender person who has, as you said, MCG, more than many others promoted this idea that men could be women and women could be. Then the entire confusion of this whole idea of transitioning and the cross dressing and the the separation of sex and gender is purely from the pit of hell, Bruce Jenner or Caitlyn Jenner. I want to call him Bruce Jenner is definitely a proponent of that. He’s championing that in Fox News has given has given him a platform.

[MCG]

You’re talking about walking your talk. I don’t know. Maybe you can say he’s a hypocrite. I don’t know what to say about this, but this is definitely in the word bunkers.

[Jay]

That’s bonkers. That’s bonkers. OK, my last one will be. A video posted by the World Economic Forum. I think this was many years ago. Once this was 2016, maybe closer to 19. I’m not entirely sure, but it’s a pretty famous video of what they believe that 2030 will be like their vision. For the world in 2030. I thought that this video was bonkers and I’m just going to list them and let the audience decide how bonkers this is. Number one, you will own nothing and you’ll be happy. Whatever you want. You will rent and it will be delivered to you via drone. the US will not be the world’s leading. A handful of countries will dominate. You won’t die waiting for an organ. Will 3D print ones. Instead you will eat much less red meat. It’ll be an occasional treat, not a staple, and that’s for the good of the environment and for our health. A billion people, they say, will be displaced by climate change. Next we’ll. Have to do. A better job at welcoming and relocating refugees. Polluters will have to pay to emit carbon dioxide. I could go so many ways with that one, but OK, next there will be a global price on carbon. This will help make fossil fuels history. Next, you’ll be preparing to live on Mars, and scientists will have worked out how to keep you healthy in space. It will be the start of a journey to find alien life and lastly, Western values. Will have been tested to the breaking point. Point checks and balances that underpin our democracies must not be forgotten. The absolute irony of that last one, the last one, is bonkers. I just can’t. Anyway, I think this entire list is bonkers for several reasons. It always boils down to the question of who is going to be determining these things. You will own nothing and you will be happy, so you will not own a house. You won’t own a car. You won’t own anything. Your clothes, nothing. You’ll own nothing. And you’ll be happy. If you want something, you.

[MCG]

Can just rent it. I know some people Google still be owning guns.

[Jay]

And I’m sure all of those people will have accidents on their boats and etc. The idea that you’ll own nothing and you’ll be happy in light of how difficult it is for couples today to start out in purchasing a home and how many homes that are within the realm or within the reach of the middle class, are actually being purchased by large corporate entities like Black Rock and so forth so that they can hold the property. And just rent it out to people is frightening to me that the. Financial independence that comes with being able to own your own home is systematically being taken away, withdrawn from people. For what reason? I’m not entirely sure. Next, the US won’t be the world’s leading superpower.

[MCG]

Well, I’m not quite sure they’re wrong on that one. They’re not especially, especially if they.

[Jay]

Wrong because we’re already.

[MCG]

Reelect certain people.

[Jay]

They’re absolutely not wrong with. See here’s my question about that is OK if the US is not the world’s leading superpower, and I don’t think we have to be, I don’t think we should need to be the world’s police or anything like that. I know that police and superpower are not the same thing, but if we’re not, who is because.

[MCG]

China, Russia.

[Jay]

OK, so their next thing was that it will be a handful of countries that will dominate, but all of these countries have different ideologies, different underpinning principles that made them what they are. So how are we going to get along and dominate together?

[MCG]

Well, I think they, I think they’re just predicting their Antichrist taking over by then. They don’t know that, but that’s that’s.

[Jay]

Ah, good point. They don’t know that that’s exactly. What they yeah.

[MCG]

That’s what they’re doing. But they’re also just showing their world view. Yeah, that’s all they’re doing because this is clearly Marxism, that it’s best if you want to put it all the way. They imagine a world that is being so perfectly run a utopia, basically, and then the earth is going to be overcrowded and we’re going to send people to Mars. Fact is going to figure out how people can live in Mars, and then they go to find aliens. Of course you’re gonna find aliens. Get any human living in Mars for any length of. Time probably gonna turn. Into alien.

[Jay]

For sure.

[MCG]

So they’re probably gonna find aliens there. But they’re just expressing their worldview. That’s all they’re doing here.

[Jay]

Less typical of people on the left, right. Ohh these leftist policies. These lesser ideologies would work. They would just work. If only people would implement them perfectly. And I’m the. It seems like they always believe that they’re the ones who actually execute it perfectly, not paying any mind to the sinfulness of men and how any system that will be implemented by anyone will always be inherently flawed, inherently imperfect, but.

[MCG]

Yeah, but it’s funny when you give them the opportunity to. Implement A subset of their population or the society with their ideas, AKA California AKA Black Lives Matter. It never works out.

[Jay]

It never works on.

[MCG]

Let’s say one of the founder of Black Lives Matter clearly said she was trained Marxist black life matter. Got what?

[Jay]

90B with a billion.

[MCG]

$90 billion.

[Jay]

Was it? Was it B with a bill?

[MCG]

You know, 90 billion or $90 million in 2020 and now they’re broke. Yeah. Well, let me say this. Their foundation is bro. The people that were at the head of a foundation.

[Jay]

The people that were skimming cream off the top, they’re doing just fine.

[MCG]

They have mansions all around their country, private jets and mansions in Canada as well, but the organization itself is broke at this point, so, you know, next year 2024 is another election year. So I guess they have their fingers and toes crossed that some police is going to do some nonsense to another black man. And they can go marching in the streets. Sure, their corporations get all foolish and decide to send them many other millions of dollars again, but again. They didn’t go to the communities that were affected, that they matters and their rioters burned down, and even Brianna Taylor mother said she didn’t receive any money. She received zero cents from Black Life matter, yet black life matter March and burned stuff down in the name of her. So again, at the end of the day. It’s going to be some people at the top, they’re going to be able to own stuff and they’re going to be people. Many, many, many people at the bottom that can’t own any. Have to restrict how they breed. Look at them, what his name? Is it John Kerry? Their climates are for Biden.

[Jay]

Are you talking about the one that ran in Florida against Bush and they had to do the recount? What’s his name again?

[MCG]

No, no, that’s him. He was also in that bomber capping at that tank. I remember his name. I think it’s John Kerry. But he actually left in July of 2023 to go. I think it’s to China to a climate summit on.

[Jay]

No, no.

[MCG]

Private jet. He flew over to China on a private jet to talk about climate change.

[Jay]

All of it. Is rules for me and not for. Thee are you referring to Al Gore?

[MCG]

I’m pretty sure it’s John Kerry.

[Jay]

OK, OK. I’ll Gore is another one that’s guilty of exactly the same thing. It’s rules for me and not for thee. Look at how they say a billion people will be displaced by climate change. I’ve noticed something that whenever you check the weather or whenever you’re watching any type of weather report, everything that’s happening in that report. Seems to always be because of climate change. There are fires in California. Oh, that’s climate change. Florida is experiencing record-breaking heat. That’s climate change. There’s uncharacteristic snow in Texas. That’s climate change, there’s a river overflowing in some potent country somewhere. That’s climate change. Everything has been tied to climate change. And so if there are different strata of people, you’ve got the people up here that are determining what who, how everything. It’s redistributed, let’s say, so it certainly won’t be any more difficult for them to decide that, OK, you people over here because of climate change. You are Emma. Getting too much carbon or too much insert devil particle here that they decide to demonize. So as a result, in the name of climate change in the name of health. In the name. Of blah blah blah. You need to do this ABC XYZ. This is what they want. As you mentioned, the whole Marxist slant so that this is what they want, a further separation of the. Elites and the poppers, the elites and the people that they’re ruling over because they know better. Again, we see here we’ll have to do a better job welcoming and relocating refugees. That’s not even touched that one, because we can see that France has been burned to the ground as we record this podcast. Countries don’t know what to do with the influx of people who do not share. Your values coming into your country and now people are gonna say that I’m racist or I’m this, that or the other. But that is a problem when you have people who do not share your ideas who. Don’t share your love of country. They don’t particularly like. You and they’re coming in to live in, in your country, and when there’s enough of them and they begin to stand up and riot and or do whatever and not saying that all of them do that. And I’m not saying that there aren’t people that are not displaced by economic, financial and perhaps weather related hardship. How do you determine these things if countries have no borders, countries have no borders, and so that’s the new standard. 20-30 people can come and go as they please. It’s this whole one world global, one world, new world. Of order. I think that their desire to break everything down and build it up, burn everything down and build it up is sounding quite deliberate. Here again, the global price on carbon, if you’re a polluter, you have to pay to emit carbon dioxide. Listen when we breathe out. What is that called? You know what I mean? Like, who decides? What the metrics are going to be? This is an incredibly dangerous agenda. I think it’s. The last point is really interesting to evaluate. Western values will have been tested to the breaking point. Checks and balances that underpin our democracies must not be forgotten and the World Economic Forum is the crystallization of a forgetting of the checks and balances. Which keep democracies, or at least democratic republics, independent and thriving. So the fact that they would put that down there as their last bullet is ironic and bonkers. Western values are already being tested to breaking point under the. Male of victimhood, of reallocating, of money and of resources, and of funds, and undermining of traditional Christian values, Western values are already being shredded, not tested, shredded and pushed to breaking point. So it’s completely bonkers.

[MCG]

I definitely agree with you on that, Jay.

[Jay]

Well, in light of all of these depressing and bonkers things that we’ve been discussing, the intent is not to bog anyone down with a feeling that the world is going to hell in a handbasket like that. Although it is, we want to leave the listener with the assurance and with the comfort. That the Bible has already told. Us that these things must come. There will be a growing anti Christian anti God sentiment among the peoples of the earth until the Lord returns and sets everything a right. Why do the nations rage? Why do the heathen rage the scriptures? God in heaven is laughing at them. God in heaven is not at all concerned about their economic agenda. God and heaven is not at all concerned with countries losing their status as superpower or nations dominating A handful of nations, dominating or reorganization or reassigning of the world. Order God and heaven is concerned with the individual people that are living in countries, states, provinces, tribes worldwide and their personal state before the God of the universe. While there is still time in this church age of ours, that is what God is concerned with the individual and their relationship with the God who created them. This is an era of grace. In spite of all of the terrible things happening, the stories of people suffering severe mental illness. To the point that they would mutilate their bodies, parents would stand by and let that happen, and people who promote this sort of thing will also go on TV to denounce that sort of thing. In a world that’s absolutely upside down the individual. See how everything goes to pot when each man is allowed to do what is right in their own eyes. It leads to death. It leads to destruction. It leads to confusion, and God is not the God of any of those things God has. Shown us the way to life and truth and peace. 2000 years. Ago, God sent Jesus Christ into the world in order to demonstrate his love for us, and that while we were yet sinners, the Lord Jesus Christ died for us so that we can be saved from this wicked age in which every man is doing what’s right in their own eyes. You may think and listen to this podcast and think that this is progress. This must happen. This is a natural result of people taking charge of their own lives and acting under their own agency. And all this sort of thing. But how’s that working? For us, our children are exhibiting increasing levels of anxiety of mental illness and desirous of mutilating their bodies or suicide. If they don’t, and adults are allowing this and many other things that we’ve described in this podcast, but the Lord Jesus Christ has shown us the way to the father, he has shown us the father. When we see Christ, we see the father. When we see Christ, we see the way we see Christ. We see the light, the life, he is the truth. And he says that no man may come into the father, but through him, no man may know life. But through him, no man may know truth. But through him, the Lord Jesus Christ. Came into the world full of grace and truth so that wretched centers like you and I can be saved from this evil generation. Do not look to your politicians. They are lying to you. Do not look to your doctors or your medical professionals. They are lying to you. Do not look to the conservative newscasters they are lying to you. Look to the truth. The Lord Jesus Christ. He has promised that whosoever believeth on him. Shall not perish, but will have everlasting life. But those that do not receive him are condemned already, because they did not believe on the only son, the Lord Jesus Christ. Turn from your sin. Turn from your ways. Look to him, and be safe today. Hey, thanks so much for listening to the Removing Barriers podcast. Did you know that you could find us on Twitter, Gab Parlor, Facebook and Reddit? Go to removingbarriers.net/contact and like and follow us on social media? Removing barriers, a clear view of the cross.

[MCG]

Thank you for listening. To get ahold of us to support this podcast or to learn more about removing barriers. Go to removingbarriers.net. This has been the removing Barriers podcast we attempted to remove barriers so that we all can have a clear view of the cross.