Episode 211

Did you know that living in Iran is preferable to living in America if you’re black? Or that cotton plant decorations are racist? On this episode of the Removing Barriers podcast, we are continuing our Bonkers series, were we pick out news headlines and discuss how they demonstrate that this world has gone bonkers. Some headlines are serious, some frivolous, but they all prove this fact. In this episode, in addition to Whoopi and Serena’s shenanigans, we discuss supreme court justice Ketanji Brown Jackson’s objectively awful dissenting opinion on nationwide injunctions and justice Amy Coney Barrett’s “spirited” response, as well as PETA’s continued efforts to police speech in the name of worshipping created animals. Terrible things are happening in our world and Bonkers doesn’t even begin to cover them, but no matter whether the headlines are silly or serious, we can rest in the fact that our God is still on the throne.

[Jay]

I don’t know why anyone would take that job. If there were even a whiff of that, why would you even take that job? You’d never be able to stop fingers pointed at your back. Why would you take that job, number one? And #2, why would you prove them right?

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 211 of the Removing Barriers podcast, and this is the 14th in the series of This World Has Gone Bonkers. And in this episode, we have lined up a number of news articles that we think show that this world is bonkers.

[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 removingbarriers.net/donate. Removing barriers, a clear view of the cross.

[MCG]

All right, Jay, well, let’s get into it. I’ll start with an oldie, but a goodie. all the way back to summer of 2025, where Whoopi claimed that black folks in the U.S. are treated just the same as women in Iran. Here is Whoopi on your favorite show, The One View.

[The View Clip]

But let’s just remember, too, the Iranians literally throw gay people off of buildings. They don’t have sort of basic human rights. Listen, here’s the thing.

[The View Clip]

Let’s not do that. Let’s not do that. Because if we start with that, we have we have been known in this country to tie gay folks to the car.

[The View Clip]

The Iranian regime is two days.

[The View Clip]

They just keep hanging black people.

[The View Clip]

It is not even the same. I couldn’t step foot.

[The View Clip]

Oh, wait, wait, wait. That’s not what you mean to say. It is the same.

[The View Clip]

No, it’s not. The year 2025 in the United States is nothing like if I step foot wearing this outfit. I’m sorry.

[MCG]

You know, this is going to be sexist, but the reason why they have these kind of argument on the one view, the name of the show is actually The View, but since they all have one view is The one view is because it’s all women. Sorry.

[Jay]

Wait a minute. Go ahead. You’re going to play more.

[The View Clip]

I can’t have my hair showing. I can’t wear a skirt. I can’t have my arms.

[The View Clip]

I’m telling you, as a.

[The View Clip]

Judge, I literally said it was up to the Iranian people. Yes, it is up to them.

[The View Clip]

And that’s why I am saying that it is the same. Murdering someone for their difference is not good, whoever does. It’s not good. So that’s why I said, you weren’t saying what I heard was not what you meant.

[The View Clip]

I think it’s very different to live in the United States in 2025 than it is to live in Iran.

[The View Clip]

Not if you’re black.

[The View Clip]

Not for everybody.

[The View Clip]

Not if you’re black.

[The View Clip]

Guys, don’t go to Tehran. Do not anyone at the table go to Tehran.

[The View Clip]

Let me tell you about being in this country, this is the greatest country in the world. But yeah, I know that. I know that. And we all know that. But every day, we are worried. Do we have to be worried about our kids? Are our kids going to get shot because they’re running through somebody’s neighborhood? They are not big deals. And I don’t mean to say they’re not big deals to you because that’s not what I meant.

[The View Clip]

And they are not doing well there either. They are not doing well in Iran. They are not educated. They’re not talking about the United States.

[The View Clip]

I’m talking about.

[The View Clip]

Nobody wants to diminish the very real problems we have in this country. That’s everyone’s intent. But I think it’s important we remember there are places much darker than this country and people who deserve rights.

[The View Clip]

Not everybody feels that way. Not everybody feels that way. Listen, I’m sorry. You know, when you think about the fact that we were, we got the vote in 1965 as.

[The View Clip]

Okay. They don’t have free and fair elections in Iran. It’s not even the same universe. They can’t go out of their house. You know what?

[The View Clip]

There’s no there’s no way I can make you understand.

[The View Clip]

Let me try something.

[Jay]

There’s no way she can make her understand because what she’s saying doesn’t make sense.

[MCG]

No, because Alyssa, I think that’s her name is Alyssa or Rissa or something like that. Mm hmm. She’s not black, so there’s no way she’s going to understand. There’s nothing Whoopi can say to make her understand because it’s black because of the color of her skin. There’s no way she can understand that black people in the US have it just as bad as Iranian woman because she’s white and Whoopi’s black and there’s no way she can understand.

[Jay]

I am exhausted just thinking of all of the emotional and mental energy it takes to constantly find things to be offended about.

[MCG]

There’s still more.

[The View Clip]

It’s like try to reverse roles with a with a black person in this country, let’s say, because I think that’s what you’re talking about. Yes. Just try to understand from their point of view, from that point of view, this country does not do them what does not go.

[The View Clip]

I completely. And we shouldn’t compare. If you’re talking about Iran, Iran, of course, is doing worse things, but relatively speaking, you know, it feels bad. I think you know that Iran is significant.

[The View Clip]

I guess we’re going to come back.

[MCG]

So when he can, when the argument is going to break, hey, Whoopi, I don’t know why, you know, if it was 1850 or 1825 and somehow Whoopi was able to make the argument, I’ll probably give it to her. If it was 1925, I’ll probably give it to her, maybe.

[Jay]

Let’s be generous. Even 1965, Let’s be generous, right? 1960, 60 years ago.

[MCG]

Well, she’s about that age, so I guess she never got out of that. But I don’t know what her net worth is, but I can go out of the limb and say Whoopi is a multi-millionaire.

[Jay]

Multi-millionaire, sure.

[MCG]

Whoopi has been in movies and all these things since I know myself. And she has been on the view for several years. And I know for a fact that her salary is at least 5 million plus per year. from the view as a black woman. But yet black women in America is just as bad as Iranian women in Iran today. Oprah is one of the richest women in the world. America has the richest black people in the world. I don’t get what we’re coming from. And then Joe Behair come in and say, oh, well, because, well, I’m black and I don’t get it because I can guarantee you, even as a man, If you give me the opportunity to live in Iran, I was living in the U.S. I’m going to live in the U.S. every day.

[Jay]

Every single time.

[MCG]

Anyways, there’s one Wes Hunt. He’s a Texan Republican House representative. Here’s his response, Whoopi.

[Wesley Hunt on Bill Maher Show]

Did you think of Whoopi Goldberg saying it’s worse to be a Black person in America today than a woman in Iran? My district in the great state of Texas is actually a white-majority district that President Trump would have won by 25 points. As I said, I’m a direct descendant of a slave. My great-great-grandfather was born on Rosedown Plantation. I am literally being judged not by the color of my skin, but by the content of my character. That’s the progress, because, like, a lot of white people had to vote for me. A lot. So I don’t even ever want to hear Whoopi Goldberg’s conversation about how it’s worse to be black in America right now. That’s a bit far. And my father, who’s 75 years old, he was a man that was in the French Quarters that had to go get a sandwich to the back door of the building. And his son is now a United States congressman in a white majority district in Texas as a Republican. That is America.

[MCG]

You know, I had a black man, black American, he’s in his 80s, and he told me, Growing up, he couldn’t even look at a white person. They would walk across the street, especially if it’s a white young woman as a black man. He’s in his 80s. He said that his grandfather is in his 70s, and he remembered when he had to go to the back of a building. We’re not talking about 75, 80 years ago. We’re talking about 2025, where we have black and brown people sacrificing their life to come into this country illegally. For what? So they can be cheated just the same as people in Iran? Why is it that people are not sacrificing their life to cross the border into Iran? Which might be a little bit easier because they don’t have to deal with sea and ocean and all those things. Might just be a desert. I don’t know. But anyways, I have a third clip from an Iranian woman responding to Whoopi.

[Fox News Clip]

But that’s somebody who actually does know what it’s like to live under the Iranian regime. If these comparisons are at all valid, and frankly, they’re just not. Iranian-American attorney and activist whose family fled Iran following the 1979 Islamic Revolution, Elika Labon joins us now. Elika, thank you for being here. It’s such a dishonorable comment, not only to the United States and what we are, but also to those thousands of people who’ve been murdered by that regime. I mean, it’s just, it makes a ridicule of what their lives stood for and what their families have gone through. What does it make you feel when you know what actually you can make a real comparison between the two countries?

[MCG]

You know, before she gets in, this is what we get when black people in the U.S. continue to behave like they’re still in slavery. When they have all the privileges and all the rights as anyone else in the country. As Dave Ramsey put it, if you do a certain number of things, if you graduate high school, if you wait until you’re in your 20s to have your first kid, make sure you’re married when you have that first kid. Your likelihood of success in this country is 80, 90%. If you just do those three things, graduate high school, get married, Have your first kid in your 20s. Your likelihood of success is like 80, 90% in this country, if not more. What do we see in the Black population? A high percentage not graduating high school, a high percentage having kids in their mid to late teens, and a high percentage not getting married. And that’s not even just for the Black population. That is for the population on whole. The Black population might be a little bit more high in numbers, but the problem is we’re not taking people back to a foundation of the word of God, of sex over marriage is wrong, marriages between a man and a woman, the foundational stuff, the Judeo-Christian stuff that this country was founded upon. But we are dwelling upon something that has been abolished over 100 years ago, and something that has not affect any black people, quite honestly, if you want to give it for the last 60 years, that it is the same as people in Iran. But anyway, I’ll let this lady speak.

[Fox News Clip]

It really, what it really speaks to now more than anything else is this mass collective delusion that we are living in. We’re living in a country that provides us so much safety, so much privilege, so much comfort that people don’t even know what it’s like to live in other parts of the world. And because, you know, the world has been saturated with so much disinformation, this disinformation that was heightened, particularly after October 7th, where there was this narrative that, you know, these terrorists are just freedom fighters and they’re not that bad. It normalized this idea that, actually, these regimes in other parts of the world are not that bad, and maybe they’re not even that different to the United States. Then you have people who are living in the lap of luxury saying things like, living in the United States is exactly the same as living in Iran. Well, it’s not anything like living in Iran, because, Iran, they are hanging people from cranes statistically once every six hours. Just two weeks ago, they amputated two people’s arms because they were accused of theft. Did they have due process? Did they have fair trials? No, that does not exist under the Islamic regime in Iran. When protesters came out in the streets to protest against this regime, which is our unequivocal right under the Constitution in the United States, did they get met with the same treatment? No, they were shot to death, and they had their eyes shot out as punishment. So my response is, how dare you, how dare anybody compare the life that they’re fortunate enough to live in the United States to what Iranian people are going through? now and have been going through for the past 46 years.

[MCG]

To what you say, Jay.

[Jay]

I just want to apologize to everyone listening to this podcast on behalf of normal black people in the country. Please don’t take what Whoopi Goldberg says as the predominant black thought, if there is such a thing, because black people are not a monolith. I promise you, not a single black person in this country I’d even dare say in this planet.

[MCG]

Besides Whoopi and Sunny.

[Jay]

Besides Whoopi and Sunny would prefer, I don’t even think they would prefer, to live in Iran over the United States. Her claim is bogus on its face. And I’m not even sure why anyone gave her the time of day, but the fact that she was able to say that on national television demonstrates the greatness of this country, the freedom of speech that we have. We are free to speak our minds, even if we are completely wrong, and we are free to speak out against what she said. I am certain. If she were in China and she said that about China, or if she were in Iran and said that about Iran, if she were in any other authoritarian country and said something against the country or against the leaders so publicly and with such malice, the outcome wouldn’t be the same.

[MCG]

I don’t know what you say with malice, but I would say definitely that she’s exercising her privilege to talk about her lack of privilege.

[Jay]

Right.

[MCG]

Anyways.

[Jay]

And it has to be malicious for you to say something like that. That’s just objectively untrue about the country that has been good to you. You’re in the top 0.01% of black people in the world when it comes to wealth, when it comes to your position, when it comes to your so-called privilege. And you still think that being black in America is about the same as being a woman in Iran? I don’t understand.

[MCG]

Well, it’s the same woman that said the Holocaust wasn’t about race because the only set of people or people group who have suffered because of the race must be African-Americans. And even talk about the privilege. During the pandemic, Oprah, who is a billionaire, had a panel of, I think it was either four or six white ladies, and she told them that they They all have privilege that she doesn’t have. And I’m talking about a multi-billionaire. And the only reason why she claimed that they have privilege that she doesn’t have is because she’s black. Anyways, your article, Jay. Yeah.

[Jay]

Let’s continue this trend of a black celebrity complaining about non-existent issues. This is from People magazine. The title is Serena Williams speaks out after finding cotton plant decoration at a New York City hotel. She said, quote, it doesn’t feel great to see cotton being used as a decoration. I know I said this in the podcast already, but I need to say it again. Imagine how exhausting it is to walk around your entire life looking for things to be offended about. looking for things that are so-called microaggressions. Here the article says, Serena Williams spoke out after noticing a questionable decoration at a New York City hotel. Williams, 43, took to social media, she took to social media with this, with a video of the decor, a vase holding a cotton plant on a table in the hallway and asked her followers for their thoughts about the display. All right, everyone, how do we feel about cotton as a decoration? Personally, for me, it doesn’t feel great, Williams said in her Instagram stories on September 25th. In a second post, the tennis star is speaking to the camera and holding a piece of the cotton used in the decoration. Williams tells viewers it feels like nail polish remover cotton and touches it before cringing and exiting the frame. Her trip to New York included an appearance at a SKIMS event in support of her appearance in the brand’s film, Bodies at Work, which promotes their new collaboration with Nike. So she and a bunch of other celebrities are meeting in New York City in order to promote the SKIMS brand, which I think is a Kardashian brand for like undergarments for women or shaping garments for women. And they’re all a part of the new campaign where SKIMS and Nike are working together alongside Serena Williams. And she’s… She’s in there, in that hotel room, participating at the highest levels of wealth, of luxury, of capitalism. You’ve got these two big companies working together to promote a new product and make even more money. But she has to find time to complain about a decoration in her room, of it being the cotton plant. I just don’t understand it. she never had to pick cotton a day in her life. Neither did her mother, neither did her grandfather, and I’m sure her great-grandfather didn’t either. Probably her great-great-grandfather had to pick cotton, I guess, if you wanted to quantify it.

[MCG]

I’m not quite sure that her grandfather didn’t, but go ahead.

[Jay]

How old is she? 43.

[MCG]

Yeah, so, yeah, her grandfather would have been probably late 1800s. 1890s.

[Jay]

Born.

[MCG]

I would assume, yeah.

[Jay]

How old is her dad? Her dad is in his 70s, isn’t it?

[MCG]

Probably. So if you go back 70 years.

[Jay]

1950s is her dad.

[MCG]

Was it? Yes, 1930s.

[Jay]

His dad probably 1930. So her great grandfather. 1920s. So now we’re talking sharecropping.

[MCG]

Probably. But yeah, 1920s, 1930s, he might have picked cotton.

[Jay]

No.

[MCG]

I don’t, maybe, not as a slave, but maybe as a sharecropper, maybe, probably.

[Jay]

Okay, let’s be generous and say that her great-grandfather, or you said grandfather or great-grandfather grandfather had to, but we have progressed as a nation to where she can be. and is recognized as the greatest female tennis player in the world. Although she would take offense to that too because she’s just a tennis player, apparently. She doesn’t want to be compared to men. She’s not a female tennis player, she’s a tennis player. I mean, the list of things these people are offended about, it just blows my mind. The reason why people use cotton plants as a decoration is because of the starkness of the contrast between the brown, wilted, sharp, ugly brown stalk of the cotton plant and the very beautiful, puffy white part of the plant that you obviously pick in order to harvest cotton and use it for clothing or whatever other textile that you want it to. So the contrast is very pretty. I like it. I think it’s pretty. And so it’s not uncommon. It’s not at all uncommon to have a cotton plant as a decoration, even if she were offended because black people had to pick cotton in the country. I find it to be hypocritical. Do you expect me to believe that she owns a garment that’s not made of cotton? Do you expect me to believe that she doesn’t use cotton on a day-to-day basis? Do you expect me to believe that she is so offended by cotton and has boycotted it to the degree that she doesn’t use it at all in her life? But as a decoration in her room, it’s a problem.

[MCG]

Well, I think a better question is, does she have anything that made in… China or those sweatshops around the world where we get our cheap stuff from.

[Jay]

Oh, you mean where slavery is still happening pretty much? They just call it labor? They just call it, you know, low wage labor, whatever they call it. You mean those places?

[MCG]

Oh, where they have kids working. And of course, you know, laws in different countries varies, but I’m saying you can always find something to be offended about if you’re looking for it. I don’t get what’s the big deal is the decoration. I’m sure that the hotel, whatever hotel she was staying in, I probably couldn’t afford to stay in it. So maybe that’s a high class, high quality decoration. I don’t know. I’ve never really seen cotton as a decoration in a hotel before, but…

[Jay]

Well, as a decoration, you just need to go to places like… TJ Maxx and all these different places where you can go shopping for home decor. That’s a very common thing. Because the stark contrast is very beautiful, I think, in my opinion. But this happened at a Christian university a few years ago. I want to say it was close to maybe 7 or eight years ago. It was, I’m trying to think. It was, it was… not too far from around the time that the, it was before the George Floyd riots and they were burning Minneapolis down and all these different things. It was a few years before that. I’ll ballpark it and say about seven, seven or so years ago. And one of the Christian university students was so offended because they went to, I’m not sure if it was like a Vespers sort of thing where like it was like a fine arts sort of something that was happening. And the decoration on the table had cotton plants, and she was so offended, and the president of the university had to issue an apology and quickly remove all of the stalks and all these sorts of things. And I’m thinking, at some point, we need to just grow a spine and say, suck it up. This is not a problem. And I understand that you somehow feel that this is a slight to your ancestors, but you also have to realize that the plant has genuine beauty to it. and people want to use it for decoration. We don’t think about the children that are exposed to all of the horrible environment and horrible situations of mining for nickel to make, or lithium to make our batteries, and we don’t boycott our computers or our phones or our whatever. This is ridiculous. It needs to come to an end. There are many things that we could spend our time complaining about, arguing about, protesting about, whatever you want to say about, then cotton as a decoration. I’m just over it.

[MCG]

Well, it’s the same principle behind renaming master bedroom to main bedroom.

[Jay]

Oh, yeah, I forgot about that.

[MCG]

Or even, you know, as a software engineer, we use a virgining tool called Git. And one of the main branches has always been named master. And a few years ago, they have been pushing it to rename it to Maine. And some people rename it to Maine, and some people keep it as master. It’s just another form of cancel culture. It’s like, I don’t see the big deal. Yeah, our forefathers had to pick cotton. Okay, that’s the big deal. We can choose to pick cotton today, or we can choose not to pick cotton today.

[Jay]

Or we can choose to participate in these multimillion dollar collaborations between two huge mega corporations and make uber amounts of money and continue our luxurious life while still complaining about a cotton plant. This is the same woman who told the world that she took GLP-1 medications in order to lose weight so that she can start the process of normalizing the use of that poison to Encourage women to…

[MCG]

I wouldn’t call it poison, but go ahead.

[Jay]

Okay. Okay. You’re a lot more generous and a lot more magnanimous than I am. But this is the same one using her influence and her power to influence women to take medication that has not, may we say, has not been fully studied for the extent of the side effects and the resulting effects, encouraging women to do those things to their bodies so that they can, I don’t know, look like her. This is an insecurity that so many women have, what they’re bodies look like. This is the same woman using her power to influence women to use this medication. The medication, by the way, that she either owns in part or is heavily invested in.

[MCG]

Yeah, but I don’t see how this is connected to the cotton.

[Jay]

So what I’m saying is she has a significant platform. Maybe I’m not saying it well.

[MCG]

Okay. Yes, she does.

[Jay]

She has a significant platform. She influences. It’s not that she can influence. She does influence millions of people. Millions of them are black. Millions of them are women. She can influence them, and she does. And this is what she has to complain about. So she’s constantly Encouraging and edging people toward a persistent state of victimhood, encouraging them to do things to themselves, for themselves, are not the best. So I guess you could say that my ultimate point is, why do we care what she has to say? It’s clear that she doesn’t have our best interests at heart, and it’s clear to me that she’s not in any way trying to address or fix the problems. I have no doubt in her tennis career and in her upbringing that she encountered racism or that she encountered negative talk about her body. She’s an athlete after all. I have no doubt that she encountered that, but to use that and weaponize it in such a way that people who listen to her will react with the same maladested way that she’s reacting to things when she She didn’t do that herself. When she had trouble with her weight when she was an athlete, what did she do? She ate less and moved more. She tried harder. She trained harder. You could tell from the movie, I’ve seen clips of the movie, the biopic of her life, when she encountered racism and when she encountered just snide remarks from people that can be described as racism, she didn’t play the victim card. She worked harder and blew everyone out of the water so that everyone knew that she was the best. So why all of a sudden this victimhood, why all of a sudden are we looking for things to be offended about? That is not the story of her life.

[MCG]

Well, I’ll give you that and I’ll give you the cotton, but again, I don’t see the connection about that, but…

[Jay]

Oh, okay, I just ran my mouth for nothing just now then.

[MCG]

I’m not saying that. I’m not saying I don’t see the connection between getting down on her to taking a weight loss jog compared to complaining about cotton. I think they’re… on two different spectrums.

[Jay]

I think the thread that I’m trying to draw here is the wielding of her influence. And it’s never for a good thing. She’s wielding the influence to encourage people to continue in their victimhood, wielding the influence to encourage women to destigmatize and to normalize the use of GLP-1 medications for something that can be addressed with diet and exercise, which is so much healthier for you.

[MCG]

Well, that’s a different, that again is a different discussion.

[Jay]

That’s a different discussion. I just don’t appreciate that something Someone so talented, so gifted, and with such a platform would wield her influence for those reasons. I don’t like it. I’m annoyed by it. And like I said, when we were talking about the whoopee thing, I am over it.

[MCG]

Well, as I said, you know, I’ll give you get down on her for the cotton issue. That’s petty that her putting stuff out there that shouldn’t be, but I don’t see all the other stuff fit in. But anyway, let’s go into a break and then we’ll come back on the side with some more bunkers. articles. We’ll be right back.

[Jay]

Are you looking for a consistent and reliable place to get all your Christian materials? Try christianbook.com. Started from humble beginnings in 1978, christianbook.com now offers a wide range of books, CDs, DVDs, homeschooling, and church supplies, plus more. So whether you are a parent, a homeschooler, a pastor, or a layperson, christianbook.com can be a one-stop shop for all your needs. Click the link in the description section below and check out the vast array of Christian materials christianbook.com has to offer.

[MCG]

All right, I’ll go to my next article. This is from the New York Post. And this is back in the summer again. Amy Coney Barrett rips Ketanji Brown Jackson over dissent in birthright citizen case. So we have two Supreme Court justices basically, I guess, against the going at each other.

[Jay]

Oh, yeah.

[MCG]

Conservative Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett. I wish they would not be describing justices as conservative or liberal or whatever the case may be because I just don’t think you should have those kind of positions when you’re a justice. It should be the Constitution, it should be the law, and not your political leaning. Well, anyway, my two cents. Conservative Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett stunned veteran bench watchers Friday on a blunt takedown of liberal Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson’s extreme dissent in the landmark Burke Wright citizen case in which a Supreme Court curtailed low-cost use of universal injunction. So basically we had an issue in this country where a federal judge will issue a nationwide injunction saying, President Trump, you can’t do this, you can’t do that. And if you understand how the justice system work, at least the federal justice system work in this country, you know, each, what you call them, I can’t remember the proper term for it, but each system unit has a certain number of states that they are over and they can put an injunction in and that will affect only those states. And what a lot of judges have been doing, especially the ones who quote unquote, disagree with President Trump, instead of just having an injunction that will affect the set of states that they are over district or whatever they call them. They will give it nationwide. So this went to the Supreme Court, and this is what they’re discussing here. So I continue reading. We will not dwell on Justice Jackson argument. which is at odds with more than two centuries worth of precedent not to mention the Constitution itself wrote Barrett the quote second newest Justice in a jaw dapping rebuke of her colleague the newest Justice she continues we observe only this Justice Jackson decries an imperial executive while embracing an imperial Judiciary so basically she’s saying hey you’re complaining that Trump is a dictator and don’t want him to be a dictator but you want to be a dictator Barrett had altered the majority opinion in the case the most consequential on the docket this term which gave President Trump a major win by limiting the power of district judges to block his actions liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor penned the main dissent for the left flank of the high court which Jackson joined was But Jackson also wrote a concurrent dissent that featured a heavy fixation on the potential practical ramification of the six three decision rather than grounding her argument in legal theory. It is not difficult to predict how this all ends. Eventually, executive power will become completely uncontainable and our beloved constitutional republic will be no more. Jackson dramatically fret at one point. Quite unlike a rule of a king governing system, in a rule of law regime, nearly every act of government may be challenged by an appeal to law, Jackson wrote elsewhere. At the very least, I lament that the majority is so caught up in minutiae of the government’s self-serving, finger-pointing argument that it misses the plot. Jackson even went so far as to dismiss the question of whether universal injunction were provided for by the Judiciary Act of 1789 as legalese. That obscures a far more basic question of enormous legal and practical significance. May a federal judge in the United States of America ordered executives to follow the law. So basically she’s saying, hey, this is just my interpretation. We’re not concerned about legalese. We’re not concerned about a law. This is how we feel about this thing. This is how we feel about President Trump. Again, I understand they’re going to be that way because they’re humans, but I hate the fact that we have justices and we can predict so much. what they going to say Barrett’s response in her opinion was almost mocking because analyzing the governing statute involves boring legalese Jackson seeks to answer a far more basic question of enormous practical significance may the federal judge in the United States of America order executives to follow the law in other words it is unnecessary to consider whether Congress has constrained the judiciary what matters is how the judiciary may contain the executive Justice Jackson would do well to heed her own admonition Everyone from the president on down is bound by the law, Barrett continues. That goes to judges too. While Barrett, 53, gave Luke Maw praise to Sotomayor, 71, for focusing her dissent on the conventional law terrain like the Judiciary Act of 1789 and other cases on equity, she She rounded on Jackson 54 for adopting a startling line of attack that is tethered neither to these sources nor, frankly, any doctrine whatsoever. Waving away the attention to the limits on judiciary power as a mind-numbing technical query, she offered a vision of the judicial role that would make even the most ardent defender of the judicial supremacy blush, Barrett wrote. Meanwhile, Jackson opted not to conclude her opinion with a common phrase, I dissent or, respectfully, I dissent in an apparent sign of her fury at her colleagues ruling. It is not something that we see every day. Republican Iowa Attorney General Brenda Byrd told the Post about Barrett’s jabs, though Byrd stressed that Barrett confined her cruelty to legal differences rather than personal attacks. Other commentators were more scaling. This is about a brutal as I ever seen scotus be one to another. Attorney Cotez Morris wrote an X in response to Barrett’s imperial Judiciary Code translate you are so stupid that you ain’t even worth responding to wow the fact that six justices were okay with signing on an opinion where Justice Barrows took a personal shot at Justice Jackson is a very strong indication that Jackson has alienated her colleagues and there is a growing lack of respect for her work and this is an ex user called shipwrecker crew or shipwreck crew whose profile describes his as a former federal prosecutor justices circulate memos among along with their legal views on certain cases in order to bring others around to their thinking. Given what she has written in her dissent, imagine the memos that Jackson must have sent around in this case. Pre-law courts has stayed Trump’s January 20th executive order narrowing the definition of birthright citizenship, which the 14th amendment states confer automatic naturalization on all individuals born in the US. After concluding the executive action was likely unconstitutional, the Supreme Court did not adjust the merits of Trump’s order. Only the powers of court had to enjoin it. So there you have it, Supreme Court justices taking educated jabs at each other. And, you know, a lot of people say Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson is not qualified. I disagree. I think she definitely has the education and the expertise and the job experience to be a Supreme Court justice. I just think the problem was, and this goes back to the DEI affirmative action thing, even if she’s qualified the way Biden put her in there put her beyond the eight ball and she’s going to be struggle to find the respect that other justices have because Biden said he’s going to put in a black woman there and it’s always going to be on her I I can guarantee you until she retires, always going to be. She got that job because she was black and a woman, not because of her qualification. And then when she say dumb things like she can’t define a woman, and then she’s happened that we shouldn’t be focused on legalese, you’re a judge. You should be focusing on legalese.

[Jay]

Legalese is your job.

[MCG]

Exactly. Leave the feeling and all these things to people like me who don’t have any degree in law and stuff like that. What does the law say? You may disagree with the law. Well, try to get it changed. But don’t tell me you’re not going to focus on legalese when we are paying you to focus on legalese, not on your feelings. You ever seen these First Amendment auditors? They will go to these places. where apparently they have the First Amendment right. Like they will go into the post office and start recording and stuff like that. And eventually a post office worker will call the police and the police will come and eventually the police will tell them, hey, I can’t do anything. It’s a public building. He has a First Amendment right. And one of the workers will say something like, he make me feel insecure or whatever the case may be, or I don’t want to be on camera and all this stuff. And the police officer said, well, I can’t do anything. They’re audited with all the police. You know, are you a law enforcement officer or feeling enforcement officer? We go by the law in this country. I’m not saying ignore people feelings, but Ketanji is seen here to be all caught up in a feeling. And I guess Coney Barrett kind of educatedly put her in a place.

[Jay]

All caught up in your feelings is acceptable for a podcaster. It’s acceptable for talking heads, pundits. It’s not okay for a justice, a Supreme Court. justice. I don’t think her issue is DEI, even though that is a significant problem, because she proved all of the DEI detractors right with this dissent. Just like Kamala Harris, who these are intelligent, accomplished women. Let’s be in Kamala Harris’s instance, let’s be very magnanimous. These are accomplished and educated women that proved the DEI detractors right. And it hurts other Black women because whether we like it or not, it creates a perception that the only reason a Black person would be put into those positions is because of DEI, not because of their intellectual capabilities, not because of their leadership, not because they are capable, but because they are Black or because they are a woman, which is so deeply insulting. I don’t know why anyone would take that job. If there were even a whiff of that, why would you even take that job? You’d never be able to stop fingers pointed at your back. Why would you take that job, number one? And #2, why would you prove them right? Why would you prove them right? them right. Anyone reading her.

[MCG]

I don’t know if I would be that, that, I don’t even know the word.

[Jay]

Gathing, unforgiving, I don’t know what to call it, but Justice Barrett is completely right on this. She’s 100% right. When you’re in that position, you can’t be led by your feelings and you can’t be ideologically captured either. So I suppose what we should take away from this is the fact that the country is in big trouble if the partisanship is in the Supreme Court. If we’re not ruling based on the law or the merits of the law, the argument, the actual hard-fought detailing through all of the so-called legalese, then if it’s all because of, hey, I’m against your team and you’re against my team, and so I’m going to find some way somehow to dissent against your team, the country’s in a lot of trouble.

[MCG]

That I would agree with. And the problem is we see it all the way throughout the criminal justice system. So it’s not just the court. We just did an episode and Irene Zeruska, and one of the reasons why this guy was let out of jail on cashless bail, you can argue, was because of judges who feel that he’s a black man and they’re going to give him a 14th chance to be out on bail.

[Jay]

They’ve bought the intersectionality, so Kool-Aid the argument, yeah.

[MCG]

And unfortunately, Justice Brown is black, and kudos, you’re the first black woman to be appointed to the Supreme Court. But I do wish she had gotten there based on her merit. And I believe she has the education and the job experience to do it. It’s just that when Biden phrased it the way he did, he gave her the finger pointers.

[Jay]

Right.

[MCG]

No other choice but to say it’s DEI. Right. If he has said, hey, I’m going to hire the best and the brightest person that I think can do this job, I’m going to give this job to the person who’s most qualified, and then he hired her. Folks might question his interviewing capability, his whatever the case may be, but they would have no evidence to say this was DEI. But when he said that he’s going to appoint a black woman to the Supreme Court, you put her behind the eight ball, even from the start, she’s climbing uphill and Equity was trying to put everyone on the same level, but by his action, former president, President Biden, he actually put her way behind. So anyways, what’s your next article?

[Jay]

Well, this is somewhat related, but it’s related in the sense that when Ketanji Brown Jackson, when Justice Ketanji Brown wrote her dissent, not only… did what she say was silly, but how she wrote it and how she said it was very silly. It was not becoming of a justice. And it’s not a stretch to say that in many ways she’s ideologically captured. The article is not wrong. to call her a liberal justice, right? And again, I say a problem in this country where we are so polarized that it’s even all the way up to the level of the Supreme Court. But the people are hyperpolarized as well. Case in point, my next article, women chug Tylenol after Trump slash RFK announcement on acetaminophen link to autism. So this is from Newsweek. Pregnant women have been posting videos on social media platforms of themselves taking Tylenol after President Donald Trump said on Monday that there was a link between the use of the pain and fever reliever during pregnancy and autism spectrum disorder. A number of women posting the video said that they would not take medical advice from the president as he did not have a medical degree, something doctors themselves have also said. And it goes on to editorialize about why that matters. So we have women taking to social media and filming themselves taking Tylenol or any version of acetaminophen in order to defy Trump, to stick it to Trump, to stick it to RFK. The level of ideological capture, or in this case, Trump derangement syndrome, to put your baby at risk. for something that was newly discovered. And as we’ll talk about, not really newly discovered, but just because Trump said it or someone in his cabinet said it, you automatically oppose it and you automatically go 180 degrees the other way. The reason why this is such an issue is because the link between acetaminophen and autism or ADHD and any other of these disorders did not just happen in 2025. This is actually research that is, I don’t want to say several decades, but at least 7 to 10 years old. This is not the first time this has been an issue. In fact, it was reported during Biden’s administration that there is a study that has some very worrying proof, or at least reason to be concerned that Tylenol or I should say acetaminophen because Tylenol is just a brand name for acetaminophen. I should just say acetaminophen. That there’s a link between that drug and ADHD and autism. I’m reading from a scientific article here from the National Library of Medicine, the National Center for Biotechnology Information. And the title of this paper is Acetaminophen’s Role in Autism and ADHD, A Mitochondrial Perspective. So these are biochemists and doctors and science people. I don’t even pretend to be a science person, but these are qualified people raising the alarm about the link between the drug and the disorders way back when, back in 2003. I’ll just read the dates here. 2018, 2003, 2016 through 2019. The official report came out in 2021. That was during Biden’s administration. Biden was president at that time. I didn’t see anybody taken to social media to chug Tylenol on purpose when it came out during Biden’s administration. Here, I’ll go ahead and read it. One in 36 children are identified with autism in 2020, a 22% increase from 2018 and a 98% increase from 2010. Simultaneously, 88 HD diagnoses increased 36% from 2003 to 2016 to 2019. Despite this surge, their etiologies remain largely unknown. However, numerous studies document higher incidences of mitochondrial abnormalities in affected individuals. Additionally, acetaminophen has been implicated in these disorders in longitudinal studies and murine models. This paper is a compilation of literature aiming to explore a theoretical framework for acetaminophen-induced mitochondrial damage in utero. It focuses on a toxic metabolite of acetaminophen, and I’m just going to shorten the scientific name. It gives a long scientific name, but it’s shortened to NAPQA. one and its role in neuroinflammation. Based on our findings, we recommend further research studying fetal mitochondria after maternal acetaminophen usage. These are the so-called doctors. Okay, let me go back. I say so-called doctors because one of the women in the video that took to TikTok to take acetaminophen on purpose just because RFK said there might be a problem just because it’s Trump. She said, well, this is me taking a Tylenol off of my headache because I am not going to listen to someone who does not have a medical degree and who was hooked on heroin for 14 years and who had a brain infection. And I’m just going to listen to the experts. Thank you very much. Well, The experts have been saying this long before RFK went up there and said what he had to say. They were saying that during Biden’s administration, they were saying that before his administration, that there is a cause to increase or at least to look at the link between the drug and the disorders because RFK said it, but because Trump said it, we’re going to have a problem. This reminds me of the women who just ostensibly decided that they were going to take the morning-after pill. This is after Roe was overturned. took to social media to film themselves taking the morning-after pill. These are pregnant women taking the morning-after pill in order to induce an abortion just because they didn’t like what happened in the courts, or they didn’t like what Trump said, or they didn’t like the anti-abortion activists and the work that was being done there. And so I’m at a loss to understand where this derangement comes from, that you would put your child at risk, even if you didn’t think there was a risk. If someone said, hey, there’s something for us to look at, I have children, and even I, who kind of look sideways at the medical community after the pandemic, even I would kind of pause and say, hey, you know, they’re not sure about a link here. Maybe I should be careful, at least a little bit of caution. But no, because Trump said it and because RFK said it, I’m gonna, I’m gonna, I’m gonna do this thing, possibly putting my child at risk. I don’t understand that level of derangement.

[MCG]

All right, so I’m gonna stick up for the ladies a little bit.

[Jay]

Okay, let’s go.

[MCG]

I too will not take medical advice from someone who doesn’t have a medical degree. So in terms of Donald Trump, I would not go to Donald Trump for medical advice, nor would I ask him for medical advice, nor would I listen to him if he talks about medical stuff. The same is true for RFK. Even though he’s the head of the Human and Health Services Department in this country, I would not take health advice from him neither. However, it is utterly ridiculous for you to go and take medicine that that you potentially don’t need just because someone tell you not to take it. It’s a defiance, but is a defiance rooted in stupidity. Because if I don’t need Tylenol, why am I going to take Tylenol? Just because Donald Trump say, hey, this might be causing autism in the kids. I don’t know what the cause of autism. I’m not smart enough to talk about any of the what we call it, what doesn’t cause it, and all that stuff. To me, that doesn’t even matter. I would just encourage these ladies, go and talk to your doctor, go and talk to your OBGYN and whoever else that can give you clear medical advice on these things. But I would say, though, don’t take any medicine because someone tell you not to take it. So because if Donald Trump go on TV, and I can guarantee you’ve got to go on TV and tell people not to eat rat poison, they’re going to be a set of the population who’s going to decide they’re going to eat rat poison.

[Jay]

Oh, goodness.

[MCG]

It’s absolutely absurd, dumb. The reaction is absolutely dumb. However, I can agree with them that don’t take advice when people don’t have medical degrees. Fine. However, I also would advise you, and most doctors probably would say this too, don’t take medical advice from Dr. Google neither, because a lot of us go to Dr. Google and all of a sudden we diagnose ourselves with many, many, many, many, many illness that we don’t have. However, this has always been the case, at least since Donald Trump. I remember on the debate stage, Kamala Harris was asked a question about the covid vaccine. And she said, well, at least let me pull it up. I didn’t plan this, so I don’t have it cure up. But this is Kamala Harris talking about whether or not she will take the covid vaccine.

[Yahoo News Clip]

Dr. Anthony Fauci and other experts say that most of the people who can be vaccinated need to be vaccinated. But half of Americans now say they wouldn’t take a vaccine if it was released now. If the Trump administration approves a vaccine before or after the election, should Americans take it, and would you take it?

[Yahoo News Clip – Kamala Harris]

If the public health professionals, if Dr. Fauci, if the doctors tell us that we should take it, I’ll be the first in line to take it, absolutely. But if Donald Trump tells us that we should take it, I’m not taking it.

[MCG]

All right, so that’s Kamala Harris saying that she’s not gonna take it. Now, as far as I can remember, in December of 2020, Donald Trump was still the president of the United States, even though he had lost their election that year and only had like a month left in office, their vaccine came out. And once Kamala Harris was sworn in as vice president and Joe Biden as president, very shortly after that, they were tooting. They were saying, hey, go and take the vaccine, the same vaccine that was approved on the President Trump. I remember in about August, September of that same year, 2020, I had a coworker. We were talking, and I was saying to him, I am not planning to take the vaccine because I don’t agree with the speed at which it was developed. He agreed. He said he’s not going to take the vaccine. President Trump lost the election. A set of coworkers were planning to do a meetup, and they invited me to this meetup, and I said, Hey, I don’t mind coming. But let me just be transparent. I didn’t take the covid vaccine. That same coworker said, Hey, I’m not coming. I’m not meeting up with anyone who chooses not to get a vaccine. And even though I didn’t call him out on that, I was like, If this is the same coworker who told me a few months ago he wasn’t gonna take it. But because he’s a raging Democrat, and I know that because while I refrain from talking politics at work, he doesn’t, so I know he’s a raging Democrat, oh, now the Democrats are in power. and he’s decided he’s going to take. To me, I don’t make the decisions based upon politics. If Donald Trump had won, if Hillary Clinton has won, if Joe Biden had won, I don’t care who is in office. I would not have been taking that vaccine, the covid vaccine. I’m not taking medical advice from any politician if they don’t have a medical degree. And even if they have a medical degree, they’re not examining me.

[Jay]

Right.

[MCG]

They’re not running tests. Why would I take medical advice from them? So anyways, that’s my two cents is That’s the country we live in today. All right, well let’s go into another break and then we come on the other side with another set of bunkers articles.

[Jay]

Are you looking for a consistent and reliable place to get all your Christian materials? Try ChristianBook.com. Started from humble beginnings in 1978, ChristianBook.com now offers a wide range of books, CDs, DVDs, homeschooling, and church supplies, plus more. So whether you are a parent, a homeschooler, a pastor, or a layperson, ChristianBook.com can be a one-stop shop for all your needs. Click the link in the description section below and check out the vast array of Christian materials christianbook.com has to offer.

[MCG]

All right, Jay, well, let me go into my last bonkers article. Now, I don’t know if this one is actually true because I couldn’t find any independent reporting on it. This is a story I saw on ex, formerly known as Twitter, and I tried to find maybe a local news article or something to back it up but I couldn’t find it so take this one grain of salt it may be true most likely true but maybe not and of course you know we can trust everything we see on the internet so there was these two Mormon young ladies can see Mormon girls they look to be probably late teens and I think that they have to be at least 18 to be a Mormon missionary so I’m assuming they’re probably 18 19 around there they look pretty young they They went and knocked on this man’s door. Turned out that, from what I understand, that he’s a gay man. And they politely invited him to church, and he gave them 10 seconds to leave his property. And rather than me telling the rest of the story, here’s the audio of it, of the story. Of course, we have audio podcasts, so we only have the audio, but this was a video. Here’s the audio of the encounter.

[Mormon Girls’ incident]

See if you would like to come with us this Sunday would you like to come with us would y’all like to get off of this property in about 10 seconds flat yeah okay have a good one run don’t walk.

[MCG]

So at the very point when he asked them if they would like to come off of this property in 10 seconds flat they immediately nodded their head I think that’s a thank you on the turn and left. This is what this guy did afterwards.

[Mormon Girls’ incident]

Run. Hershey, get back here. That’s not fast enough. That’s not fast enough. That ain’t fast enough, ladies. I said go. I said go. Go, go, go, go, go, go. Run, run, run.

[Mormon Girls’ incident]

Pray about it.

Pray about it.

[Jay]

He shot at them.

[MCG]

With a BB gun.

[Jay]

Still.

[MCG]

So apparently, again, as I said, the video shows this, that they immediately turned and left. According to him, you guys, you hear from the audio, they weren’t going fast enough, even though they were walking. And he told them, hey, don’t walk, run. And when they weren’t sat in to run, he… fire a BB gun. And again, he didn’t look like he was pointing the BB gun at them. He looked like he was pointing them straight ahead and they were to his left and he was pointing straight ahead and pulling the trigger. And they started running a little bit after that. But again, I couldn’t find any news articles on this, but that annoys me. made me upset because I go knock on doors a lot again I don’t agree with the normal message but that’s not even important they exercising the First Amendment right that they have the Supreme Court has ruled over and over and over again that Christians have the right to go and knock on someone door what you don’t have the right to is to pull a gun whether is BB gun or not and fire it at people who are not being of any threat to you again I’m no lawyer I’m no police officer I can speak for my County I I personally asked a police officer in my county that I know pretty well, what’s the baby gun laws in the county? He said to me, it is the same as a real gun. Wow. So if you’re pointed at somebody or you put someone in fear of their life, you can be charged just as if it was a real gun. What this guy did was assault.

[Jay]

Absolutely.

[MCG]

And I hated that I can’t find any more information than this, but I would be happy if this guy was arrested and charged, prosecuted, and sent in jail for what he did to these young ladies. They were doing something that is legal for them to do. When he asked them to leave their property, they left right away. Apparently, they weren’t going fast enough. It’s not like they were, you know, dragging their feet. They were just walking.

[Jay]

Right.

[MCG]

You know, they were young ladies in long skirts. How fast do you want them to run or walk? This annoys me because we just saw a prominent Christian assassinated and stuff like that.

[Jay]

Right.

[MCG]

This, I think of course, this happened before that, but it just rubbed me in the wrong way to see someone would do something like that for people that are being non-violent, non-confrontational, simply inviting you to church. All thing you have to say, no, have a good day. They leave.

[Jay]

Even if you slam the door in their faces, that would be preferable to what he did.

[MCG]

They left right away and you pull a BB gun on them. Anyways.

[Jay]

Wow.

[MCG]

I’ll leave it there. What’s your…

[Jay]

I don’t even want to talk about my third one after that because it doesn’t mean anything in light of what those girls had to face at the door. I definitely take that to heart too because we’re out witnessing every week and anyhow, that’s awful. I just have a silly article here about PETA, a new ism. It’s called speciesism. Speciesism. Speciesism? speciesism, whatever it’s called. It’s silly and it’s ridiculous. So they want to police our language so that we have…

[MCG]

What’s new?

[Jay]

Stop using anti-animal language. So instead of kill birds with one stone, say feed two birds with one scone. Instead of be the guinea pig, say be the test tube. Instead of beat a dead horse, say feed a fed horse. Instead of saying bring home the bacon, you say bring home the bagels. And instead of take the bull by the horns, they want you to say, take the flower by the thorns. This is another instance. Well, PETA is a ridiculous organization altogether. I think they started out with good intentions to prevent just some of the horrific abuses that animals endure in the country, whether it’s from mechanized farming and things of that nature, ranching and things like that. But to go so far as…

[MCG]

I don’t think that’s definitely abuse. There’s also anything wrong with using the animal to do plowing.

[Jay]

No, PETA originally was against the killing of animals to an exaggerated degree purely for vanity things like, you know, killing a bird just for its feathers. Like, literally not even for meat, not even for sustenance, just for its feathers. Or when you look at the animals that are mass produced, a lot of the workers abuse the animals, picking them up and slamming them against the, you know, just being cruel to the animals for no apparent reason. PETA used to be sensible and be against those kinds of things, but now it’s It’s gotten to the point where we’re expected to elevate these animals to the level of worship. And even our speech can’t be contrary to these animals, which I think is completely ridiculous. I just thought it was funny because they came up with a new ism. We had racism, we had ageism, we had sexism, we had all these other isms. They came up with another one. This is called speciesism. And I just thought it was ridiculous. It was worthy of a mention. And so I threw that in there. But man, I don’t even feel like I want to talk about that after that whole Mormon BB gun attack. That’s just absolutely insane. And there needs to be follow up. There needs to be some something. He needs to be charged and he needs to face justice for that. That’s horrible. Sorry, I know that we were bouncing back and forth between articles there, but go ahead.

[MCG]

Well, let me kill two birds with one stone and say that.

[Jay]

Hey, excuse me. It’s feed two birds with one scone.

[MCG]

I don’t know if that baby gun stuff is true because he was dumb enough to upload that video himself because that video was taken from a maybe a ring camera or something. And he seemed like it was somewhat of a rural area. So I don’t know. I don’t know if it’s true, but I think it is. But I couldn’t find any independence. So to back that up. And 2, you know what? I’ll give Peter this. I prefer that they challenge that speech than rather to tell me to use pregnant person or

[Jay]

Birthing person.

[MCG]

Birthing person or whatever the case may be. I prefer.

[Jay]

People who breastfeed.

[MCG]

Right. I prefer that I use Peter language than to use this politically correct language that they have been forcing about all along. Of course, I’m not going to be using Peter language, but if I had to choose between one and the other, I prefer avoid using this language towards animals, as long as I can continue saying father and mother and those things that the left has been trying to. censored for years now so I’ll give Peter that

[Jay]

okay yeah I think that’s fair I think that’s fair

[MCG]

dishonorable mentions all right dishonorable mentions well I have two dishonorable mentions one is Virginia High School staff arrange students abortion and get this without parental consent And of course, this happened where? Fairfax County. Oh my goodness. One of the largest school county in the nation. So this number mentioned, I got to read it, but that’s one out there. And also in New York, there is, let me kind of just pull this up. Well, I don’t have it, but it’s safe injection sites. This is in New York and basically I think this is like some kind of park or something, some place in East Harlem and You know, the safe injections are where folks can go and get clean eagles and jugs and they can shoot themselves up. Well, apparently there are people that live around the area has now been, how do I put this at PG-11, is that these people will come to these sites, get their jugs and get their clean needles and get high. And then they will participate in actions that should only be taking place in the bedroom in broad daylight in front of everybody all the neighbors can see because of course they’re high. on whatever drugs they’re getting because they’re safe. And all of a sudden, one neighbor described it as a free ***** show, basically, that these men and women just engage in public activity at these sites because…

[Jay]

Wait, what, because of the drugs or because, like what?

[MCG]

Well, it’s a free site that the government of New York… city is giving them clean needles and drugs or whatever the case may be. So they can come to this place and shoot up and inject themselves with these drugs.

[Jay]

And once the drugs are in, they…

[MCG]

And once they get high and whatever the case may be, anything take place, I guess a majority of them decide to start performing certain activities with each other in broad daylight at those sites. So this honorable mention, This world has definitely gone bonkers.

[Jay]

Oh goodness. Well, speaking of the world going bonkers, my dishonorable mention would be referring to a particular person who I think has gone bonkers. Candace Owens, I believe, has recently gone bonkers. Maybe I just was blind to it all this time and she was bonkers all along, but it just seems to me recently she’s gone completely off the deep end. She’s recently been making allegations It seems like she’s been making, I don’t watch her content, and so I can’t say in full detail, but it seems that she perhaps is among the group of people who somehow found a way to pin the Charlie Kirk assassination on Israel. She’s been anti-Israel for quite some time now, and I think she’s bonkers on that, the whole Brigitte Macron thing that she’s going after like a dog on a bone. It seems that somehow, in many ways, that she’s lost the plot and that she’s no longer doing journalism that sheds light on issues that people are not willing to talk about. It seems like she centered her whole personality on being contrary and on attacking Protestantism in many ways. She has been in the last few days or weeks in the clips and the videos that I’ve seen of her. Speaking of the world going bonkers, my dishonorable mention is the many ways that Candace Owen seems to have gone bonkers, which is sad to see because there was a time where she was bringing journalism that made you think, just, you know, articles and pieces and podcasts that had you looking at something to have you question the official narrative in a conducive way, in a productive way. Sadly, all of that seems to seems to be gone, and she seems to have gone bonkers. That’s my dishonorable mention there.

[MCG]

Yeah, I don’t know what to say about Candace Owens. I would do say this, though, Brigitte Macron, is that the name?

[Jay]

Mm-hmm. The French.

[MCG]

The French first lady. is suing her in courts in the U.S. for claiming that she is actually a transgender woman. And it came out lately that Brigitte is going to provide photographic and genetic or biological evidence that she is a woman. Now, what exactly is she going to provide? The article said that she’s going to have pictures of when she was pregnant with her kids, but I don’t know exactly what the genetic or biological evidence is going to be. Is it going to be a blood sample? It’s going to be whatever the case may be, where lawyers and doctors can independently prove that she’s ** and not XY. I guess we’ll see. I haven’t really followed on this in a while. Again, just because I will say since she maybe shortly before she left Daily Wire or was let go from Daily Wire, you know, she kind of went off.

[Jay]

Off three of us a little bit.

[MCG]

I don’t know if I would put it that way. She’s definitely doing something right because she has millions and millions of subscribers on YouTube and followers, so she definitely do something right. But the last episode I think I watched in full was her very first episode that she did on YouTube when she came back after being fired from Daily Wire. I haven’t looked at any other episode in the complete narrative sense. I’ve seen her on the Pierce Morgan show on Censors show and stuff like that. There’s still some stuff that you say that makes sense or whatever the case may be. But this Virginia Macron stuff is the one that I’m like. I didn’t watch a documentary because he come across him as a gossip section of the newspaper. I don’t read that stuff. I don’t care about that stuff. I don’t care about French politics, so to speak. Most Americans don’t even understand French politics. So I don’t really get into that. And even if Brigitte is a man who have transitioned into a woman, quote unquote, in today’s world, who cares? to get why that’s important to her as an American. If it was in the UK, I don’t know, she married a UK citizen, and she’s interested in what politics in the UK, I can say okay, but this is in France. I don’t know of her having any connection to France. I could be wrong. Maybe her husband does. I don’t know. But I don’t know what the fixation is. I will say though, I hope Brigitte win the case, but I guess it has to be proven that she’s a woman and even If you have to prove that she’s a woman, the question, which is, unfortunately, we’re going to have to ask, what definition of a woman are they going to use? Let’s say…

[Jay]

If we ask Justice Brown, they can’t say.

[MCG]

Well, let’s say Candice is right. Let’s say Candice is right, that she is a trans woman. What definition of a woman are they going to use in the court? will determine whether Candice is right or wrong. If the court determines that a woman is anybody who identifies as a woman, Candice is going to lose. If the court say, well, a woman is adult female with ** chromosomes, in my belief, Candice is still going to lose because I don’t think Bridget is a transgender woman. I don’t know. And quite honestly, I don’t really care. But it will be interesting. The one good thing that might come out of this is that for the first time, at least I think it will be the first time, in a U.S. court, we will get a definition of a woman. Because I don’t think-

[Jay]

Some good will come out of it after all.

[MCG]

So I don’t think that has happened in the U.S. yet. I know earlier this year, 2025, the British Supreme Court came out with a definition of a woman because of what was happening in Scotland. And they define a woman basically as an adult female with XS chromosome. So at least in the UK, they have a solid legal definition of what a woman is. I don’t think that has come to the courts in the US yet. So if there’s one good thing that’s going to come out of it, at least the courts in the US are going to have to be forced, at least this particular court in this particular district that she’s been sued in will be forced to define a woman. I don’t know what state and I don’t know what District that Bridget filed her lawsuit in if I’m a betting guy I would guess it’s I believe in California and who knows what they going to say over there is a woman I don’t know but any which way it seems like Bridget is going to win this case bearing the fact that I believe she’s a biological woman but I don’t know and Again, I just don’t understand why she had to go over it, but whatever the case may be, she obviously doing something right because she has way more followers and way more subscribers and way than just a bigger platform than we even have. So we don’t even close. So anyways, that would be my two cents on that. All right, I’ll close with this article from the Christian Post. And it’s just something that’s interesting, sobering for us in the West compared to someone in the East. So Pakistan allows Christian women to remove Islam as a religion in years long battle over ID cards. So this woman has an ID card and then the ID card, we don’t necessarily do this in the West. At least we don’t do it in the US. I don’t know of any country in the West that does this. I could be wrong. But many Asian countries, countries in the East, when you get your ID card, your religion is stated on there. So this is a Pakistani woman who who converted to Christianity and have been fighting the courts, trying to get her ID updated from Islam to Christianity. Wow. Not a big deal here in the West, but I can see why it is in Asia and over there in the East. Lahore, Pakistan. In a redevelopment, a high court in Pakistan ordered the government to issue a new identity card reflecting a woman’s conversion from Islam to Christianity. The woman whose name is being withheld for security reasons renounced Islam and married a Christian man 15 years ago. Attorney Lazar Ala Raha said that for years she had repeatedly tried to get her fate designation corrected on her national identity record, but officials at the National Database and Registration Authority , They finally refused. She converted to Christianity in January 2009 and married a Christian man four months later. The couple have five children and have resided in South Punja since they were married, he said. After her efforts to get a new identity card failed, the woman sought help from the advocacy organization Christian Solidarity International, which put her in contact with Raqqa. I’m sure I’m saying that incorrectly, but I’ll go on. A Christian attorney known for taking up sensitive cases pertaining to religious freedom in Pakistan. He filed a petition to Lahore High Court submitting that she had converted to Christianity of her own free will and married a Christian man in a ceremony officiated by a pastor. The couple have five children, but though NADRA has issued a children’s B form, it did not include a mother’s identity card number in the document. ostensibly due to her marriage with a Christian Raka told the Christian Daily International Morning Star News when the petitioner again went to get her ID document corrected NADRA records in October 2024 the officials then refused to accept her Christian baptism certificate marriage certificate and birth certificate of her children instead threatened her with dire consequences for renouncing her Islamic fate Raka said that on July 1 A single-member bench comprising Justid Sahed Karim ordered NADRA to treat the woman case as a mistaken entry and his or her new identity card with Christianity as her fate. NADRA denials to issue an adult woman her identity card with her new faith was clear violation of Article 20 of the Constitution of Pakistan, which guarantees every citizen the right to profess, practice, and propagate their religion, he said. It also violates Article 4 and 9 of the Constitution that guarantee protection of law and security of life to every Christian. The attorney said that the couple was thrilled to finally obtain the woman’s new identity card. They had faced several challenges over the years due to this issue, including obtaining birth registration certificates for their children and getting them enrolled in school. He said now they are relieved that the years-long struggle has finally come to an end. He clarified that there is no specific law in Pakistan that explicitly criminalized apostasy. which some schools of Islam jurisprudence consider a sin punishable by debt. However, apostasy can lead to persecution or the Pakistan blasphemy laws, particularly Section 295A that prescribes imprisonment of up to 10 years for hurting the religious settlements of any community, Raqqa said. Additionally, societal stigma and potential violence from Vigilante groups are real threats for those who choose to convert to other faiths this is the reason why most converts of Christianity avoid going to courts and prefer to remain secret Believers all their lives in our path I would say that you know no Christians are enrolling in the Secret Service Muslims cannot change their religious designation in the NADRA computerized national identity card, scenic, to any other religion. So that’s why they were given a hat time. She was born in a Muslim family, and they don’t allow them to change it if they were born as Muslim. Whereas people who convert to Islam from other faiths can get their scenic amended according to the scenic registration policy. The policy states, however, that any mistakes by applicants to state their religion correctly due to illiteracy may be handled in office under a fault category. So that’s what they end up going around saying, okay, use it as a fault, as a mistake and correct it. Pakistan is ranked number eight on Open Doors 2025 rural watch list of the most difficult place to be a Christian. I’m just saying this, man. We live in the West and we have all these freedoms. We don’t have to put our religion on our ID cards. And I can go out on a limb that most Christians in the US probably would not want to put that on the ID card. But here’s a woman under the threat of life, being killed, being whatever the case may be, decided, hey, you know what? I want to identify with Jesus at whatever cost it is. And I have to commend her for that because, you you know, would I want to put a religious designation on my car? Absolutely not. But I know even in the islands I grew up in, on our driver’s license, they will put our blood type. And the purpose for that is if you get in a car accident or whatever the case may be, they can even need to know your blood type rather than have to do a test. In the US, my blood type is not on my driver’s license. So, you know, but I give this young lady props for doing that because we have the freedom in this country to go and share the gospel, the freedom in this country to go and knock on doors. sometimes we run into the knock on heads like this guy that fired the BB guns. For the most part, it’s peaceful. For the most part, if people wanted to get off of their property, we’ll just simply ask you to leave and you just leave and that’s that.

[Jay]

Unless Mormon folks are at your door and they shoot BB guns.

[MCG]

But for the most part, we have the freedom. We don’t use it. Here’s a woman that don’t have the freedom and trying to get it. even as something as simple as getting her religion designation on her ID card to say Christianity rather than Islam, because she wants to identify with Jesus. So I ask the question every time, every time we do a bunkers, do you agree with us? Do you think that this world is bonkers? Well, I think the next question after that, if you do agree that this world has gone bonkers, what are you doing about it? If you’re saved, born again, May I encourage you to separate your Jerusalem with the gospel of Jesus Christ. As one person said, evangelism is just one beggar telling another beggar where to find bread. And the Bible declares in Mark 16:15, and he said unto them, Go ye into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature. And my admonition is, would you go?

[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.

[MCG]

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