Episode 239

Muslims try to shut down Christian evangelism, a former lieutenant governor commits murder-suicide, scientists just can’t let go of millions of years despite evidence, and a sad generational case in Trinidad all remind us of the desperate need for evangelism and ministry to the lost all across the globe. Political and social commentary can be made one way or the other, but Jesus Christ and Him crucified is the only truth that can defeat Islam, nihilism, evolution and millions of years, and the destructive power of sin. He was buried and was raised on the third day, and He has promised that whosoever believes in Him has eternal life. So when we talk to our family, friends, and neighbors about His power to save, we can share real hope and true help. Sometimes it results in hard truths that are counter to our current culture; we can expect to be ignored, mocked, or perhaps even attacked for it, but we simply cannot leave the world to itself without the Savior. The least we can do is try to reach them with the gospel because this world has gone bonkers.

[MCG]

Now, sorry parents, I didn’t mention this episode might be parental guidance required. So if you have young ones around, maybe you don’t want to listen to this episode with an earshot of them, or maybe you want to use headsets or something. No, I went to public school in the islands.

[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 239 of the Removing Barriers podcast. And this is the 18th 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 slash donate. Removing barriers, a clear view of the cross.

[MCG]

All right, Jay, I’ll start out with an article out of Trinidad and Tobago, my neck of the woods in the Caribbean. This article has 120 words. So it’s basically a paragraph. And it took me probably a half an hour to read it. You may be wondering why, but just the title of the article alone, I probably spent 5 minutes pondering on it. The title of the article is 8 year old tells 19 year old mother she was being raped. Now, sorry parents, I didn’t mention this episode might be parental guidance required. So if you have young ones around, maybe you don’t want to listen to this episode within earshot of them or maybe you want to use headsets or something. Now, I went to public school in the islands. I don’t think I got the best education there is that money can afford because it was free. So I guess I did get the best education money can afford. But I had to pull up my calculator and all that stuff and like 8 from 19, it’s still 11, right?

[Jay]

I did not do well in math at school, but I am willing to say with complete certainty that 19 – 8 is 11.

[MCG]

Okay. And depends on when she’s born and when this baby was born, it’s highly likely or possible that she got pregnant at 10 and had the baby at 11, or maybe she got pregnant at 11 or had the baby at 11. I don’t know. As far as I know, they taught me in school that a woman is normally pregnant for, let’s say nine months, 40 weeks, you know, the end of the ninth month, some people say 10 months, whatever. So it’s within a year. So she could have got pregnant at 10, think maybe at 11 or got, but whatever the case may be, it just blew my mind that they just mentioned their head in 80 year old tells 19 year old mother she was being raped. I’m like, okay, I guess it was just a bit too casual for me. I don’t know. So it took me a while to move beyond that. Anyways, the article reads 120 words. Police are investigating the alleged repeated rape of an 18-year-old girl by her 63-year-old grandfather at their shared family home. The incident came to light around 2.30pm on Tuesday. The victim was reported lying on her grandfather’s bed when the suspect allegedly raped her. The child later disclosed the assault to her mother, a 19-year-old. The mother took the girl to the Rio Clara police station, where a formal report was lodged. During the interview in the presence of the child’s mother, the victim revealed that the suspect had allegedly sexually assaulted her on several previous occasions at the same address. The child was subsequently taken to the Rio Clara Health Center, where she underwent a medical examination. Officers from the Child Protection Unit are continuing inquiries. An investigator is expected to be appointed shortly. And that’s the end of the article. I have questions. It’s like, who’s the father of the eight-year old? And is he in jail? And why is it that an investigator be going to be appointed shortly? for a grandfather who’s repeatedly ****** his eight-year-old granddaughter, why is he not in jail? I’m like, I don’t know. Flabbergasted is the word? I don’t know. What do you think?

[Jay]

Yeah, I’m at a loss for words as well. Why is the grandfather not in jail? Where is her father? And why was an 11-year-old pregnant in the 1st place?

[MCG]

You know, I did some research and again, parental guidance for this episode. Even my second bonkers article is crazy as well. Well, I guess that’s the title of the episode. But I did some research because I was curious. Again, probably that’s why it took me half an hour to read 120 words. So I said, hey, Duck AI, what is the age of the youngest mother ever recorded? You want to take a guess.

[Jay]

I’m afraid to.

[MCG]

Five years old.

[Jay]

Oh my.

[MCG]

Five years old. And there’s some sort of condition that a young lady can have that bring on very, very early onset puberty that would cause them to be able to have a baby at that age. And according to Doc AI, she actually got pregnant at 4 and had a baby at 5. So.

[Jay]

That is awful.

[MCG]

I also asked Duck AI what was the age of the youngest grandmother I recorded? That was 23. Crazy. The youngest father, I think, was about 11 or 12, 11, I think. And the youngest grandfather was about 19. So.

[Jay]

Did Duck AI happen to mention what year these atrocities were happening?

[MCG]

Some of them were pretty out there. Like, early 1900, 18 something. So it wasn’t anything super recent, but I just wanted to get a perspective of why am I, I’m thinking this thing is so crazy that an 80 year old is going to their 19 year old mother. That’s your sibling. But it’s not even the worst stories out there. So I did that to get perspective, but I don’t know if he gave me perspective or he just horrified me more. But anyways.

[Jay]

I’m reminded of the historical account of Jonah where the Lord did not want to destroy Nineveh because there was a certain number of people there that couldn’t tell their left hand from their right and how Jesus has very sharp, harsh words, condemning words for people who would create a stumbling block for children. There are many ways to do that. But one of the most egregious ways is to sexually violate a child. And the scripture is very, very clear about that. It’s really a terrible, terrible article, a terrible thing that’s happened. And it seems to be something that has repeated or been repeated in this culture or perhaps in this family. I imagine that this is not the norm in Trinidad, that young girls are impregnated so young that are assaulted. Now, the statistics for sexual assault both in this country and around the world are absolutely staggering, heartbreaking, and sobering, and something absolutely has to be done. This, sadly, is not the only case of very young prepubescent girls being assaulted or perhaps being impregnated by their predators by their rapists. And I’m sure this is something that grieves the heart of God. And for anyone that has even a modicum of, I can’t even say, I’ll just say morals. We won’t even attribute it to scripture. We’ll just call it morals. Anyone with a modicum of that would be absolutely outraged by this. is a tragedy. a 63 year old.

[MCG]

It’s not just a tragedy for the 80 year old, which is really bad. It’s generational. It’s a mother that getting pregnant or having a baby at 11 and then her 80 year old. And you can understand that that child is not able to raise her own child.

[Jay]

Right.

[MCG]

And then you wonder why was she in that position at 11 or 10 to get pregnant? And then you realize, hey, look who her father is. so this is a generational, I wonder where the mother, but anyways, I’m just saying there’s so much things going on here that I’m not even sure where to put my finger on it. Where do you start with this?

[Jay]

Was there any follow-up to this? Is the grandfather in jail?

[MCG]

I haven’t looked for any follow-up.

[Jay]

Insane.

[MCG]

That’s all I found, but I didn’t really search for a follow-up. But anyways, what’s your first article?

[Jay]

No, I’m all depressed. Hi. Okay. my first article is titled Court Overturns Mosque’s Attempt to Ban Christian Evangelists from Sharing the Gospel Just Outside. Now, it might sound like this is not a bonkers because the court actually did a good thing by overturning this attempt. What I find bonkers is that a mosque would even try to ban the Christian evangelists in the 1st place. I’ll read from the article. This is from MSN.com. A controversial Islamic project in Texas tried to stop Christian evangelists from preaching and distributing literature on property outside their mosque, but a Texas court dismissed the lawsuit enabling Christians to continue sharing the gospel in the area. The East Plano Islamic Center, also known as EPIC, filed a lawsuit against Testimonies of God, a Christian evangelism ministry in October 2025, according to a report from the Christian Post. The mosque complex wanted a quote temporary and permanent injunction barring the Christians from handing out evangelical pamphlets, letters, flyers or other documents offensive. to the Islamic faith. Let’s put a pin on that paragraph or that sentence and come back to it. Any type of literature offensive to the Islamic faith. Epic was especially annoyed that the outreaches occurred on Fridays, which is when Muslims assemble for religious services. The lawsuit said that the evangelist, quote, set up a tent, bought external speakers, and came with evangelical pamphlets and signs that they attempted to hand to passerbys, all of whom were attempting to enter the mosque for prayer services. A document responded to the lawsuit, of which Heritage Grace Community Church was another defendant, said that the complaint marked a shocking and illegal demand. Such demands are an unthinkable attack on our country’s core values of free speech and freedom of religion. The document said under the injunction that the plaintiff demands a local church would be prohibited from even handing out free Bibles. The document added that the defendants do not block sideways or interfere with traffic and noted that they positioned themselves 500 feet away from the mosque adjacent to a six lane road. Okay, so I’d like to pause there for a second. So they’re not on the mosque property. They are on the side of the road 500 feet away from the mosque. And this is still a problem. I’m glad that the court overturned this ban. However, I’m not looking at this with rose-colored glasses enough to say that even some Christians would read this and say that the Christians in this particular article were behaving unbecomingly. In other words, a lot of them would say something along the lines of, well, how would you feel if a group of Muslims set themselves up 500 feet away from your building and started blasting the call to prayer, an Islamic call to prayer, or laid out rugs and things and handed out literature and Qurans and everything before people came into your property. I imagine that many Christians would counter with that argument, which I find to be problematic, to say the least. I understand we live in a pluralistic society. This is a country that has freedom of speech and freedom of religion, freedom of association, all of these things that we hold dear. But to, I don’t know, I’ve been wrestling with this lately, to extend that to a group of people that generally harbor Another group of extreme people that are willing to kill others for their beliefs, I find that to be a little bit problematic. Now, if these believers were prohibiting or inhibiting people from walking into the mosque or harassing people, or if they were like Don Lamont and actually went into the building and created a ruckus for their ideology or for their faith, that would be a different story altogether. But these Christians were on the side of the road, 500 feet away from the mosque, evangelizing, passing out their quote, literature offensive to the Islamic faith. What’s interesting about Epic, the article continues, and I’ll just paraphrase it, is that this is the same organization, Islamic organization, that’s trying to establish a sort of distinctly Islamic compound right there in the middle of the city. If you scroll down and you read the article a little bit, it also says that Epic is behind the controversial Epic City project, which would create a distinctly Islamic subdivision in northern Texas. The project was recently rebranded to The Meadows. It would involve 1,000 homes centered around a mosque, a school, and other Islamic facilities. In other words, they’re trying to establish another Dearborn, Michigan right there in Texas, which is a problem, I think.

[MCG]

A couple of things. Firstly, we have this little pesky thing called the First Amendment, so which both sides are able to exercise. So the Muslims are able to exercise that First Amendment expression, religion, speech, assembly, protests, and so on. And then also we are a nation of laws. So my question for the Christians would be, you know, they set up speakers and stuff like that. Are they violating noise audiences? Now, of course, that along with the First Amendment, there can be a little bit of a overlapping there. You know, how much noise is too much noise? And when does your noise become a violation rather than expression and exercising the First Amendment right. So my thing is, if the noise weren’t disturbing the ability to have whatever they have at their mosque, of course, let them exercise their freedom of religion, freedom of expression and stuff like that. If it was to a level where they can’t have, I’m going to call it a service, I don’t know what Muslims call their stuff, the gathering, and it was disturbing them, an argument legally can be made that they were in the wrong to some degree. And To some degree, if Muslims were gathering 500 feet from my church where I worship and they were being loud enough to disturb the service, I would want law enforcement to step in and shut it down because they’re loud enough to disturb the service. As a matter of fact, I have knocked on doors close to our church or close enough, and folks would tell us that based on certain frequencies and stuff like that with our mics and with our system that the electronics pick up our stuff and they can hear it as plain as they, you know, of course they can always turn the electronic off or turn it on a different channel or whatever the case may be. But I’m not aware of any lawsuit or anything saying, hey, you need to change the channels you operate on or whatever. I guess what I’m saying is fine if you want to do that and obey the Great Commission and exercise your First Amendment rights and stuff like that. And as you said, you’re not blocking sidewalks and not blocking anything and they’re not disrupting the service in a way that you would now violate maybe noise audiences. I would say go for it. But I think the Muslims also trying to overreach here and say, hey, you can even exercise your rights here. No, this is a free country. This is not, you know, Iran or one of those places where we can enforce Sharia law or whatever you guys figure you can enforce. But at the same time, as long as they’re not being impolite, even if legally they might be right, and if you’re meeting legal standard, you’re scraping the bottom of the borrow. Legal standard is just the bottom of the borrow. That’s why these politicians get away with all the things they get away with. Because legal doesn’t mean you’re moral. It doesn’t mean you’re polite. It doesn’t mean that you’re in right standard with God. It just means you’re the last ring on the ladder if you’re just being legal. So Sure, go and evangelize and hand out Bible. I have questions. I would wonder how effective they have been. Again, you don’t measure evangelism by effectiveness of how many people get saved or how many people show up to your church because you never know how God works in someone’s life. But I would have that question nonetheless. of, hey, have you seen anyone turn up? Have you been able to share the gospel with anyone verbally or what the case may be? Because you might be hardening some hearts. I don’t know. So I hope they’re doing it in a loving, Christ-like way, and it’s just annoying the Muslims that they have the freedom to do that. If that’s the case, well, keep on doing it. If you’re being obnoxious, loud, disrupting their service, you might have a legal right to do so somewhat. but is it the best thing to do? Maybe not. That would be my take.

[Jay]

Okay, so I actually pulled up the address of this epic, this East Plano Islamic Center, and I pulled it up on Google Earth and I did some measurements to see what are we really talking about here, okay? So if you were to pull up Google Earth and you look at where this Islamic Center is, It’s actually not just a building where Muslims gather. It’s actually more like a compound. So what it looks like is like, it looks like a block. Like you know how a city block that has been kind of, it looks like a city block that you can turn into. And everything in that block or everything on that compound is part of epic. So when you first turn into the driveway, let’s say, or the road that leads into all of the different facilities that is Epic, you have this gigantic parking lot first on one side. And across the street from the parking lot, you have, it looks like it’s called the Epic Medical Center. So maybe it’s just a clinic or a hospital or some type of medical facility for Muslims, obviously. And then you drive further on. There are other buildings, maybe a school of some sort, and then you come to this gigantic building that seems to be where they meet to worship. So the distance from the road to maybe the parking lot or the medical center is about 500 feet. The actual building where they gather to worship is much further away. So perhaps The court took that into account and decided to overturn the request for the ban simply because the basic information in that request was not true. Even if you had a loudspeaker, I don’t think that you’d be able to hear it in the, let’s call it the mosque. It looks like the mosque itself. It doesn’t look like you can hear it. Well, how do I know? What do I know? I don’t even know what kind of speaker they had, but the idea that they were right outside of the mosque just 500 feet away from the front door is actually not true. The front portion of the mosque is not even facing the direction of the road that you would have to come into in order to access the mosque.

[MCG]

Well, don’t get me wrong. I agree with the ruling from the judge because it would have been a slippery slope otherwise.

[Jay]

Sure.

[MCG]

I’m just saying, as Christians, we’re not trying to just meet a legal standard. Because as I said, a legal standard is you’re scraping the bottom of the barrel. Right.

[Jay]

However.

[MCG]

But as I said, as long as they’re not being obnoxious, disrupting the service, I am not familiar with Texas. I’ve been there once. I’m not familiar with Texas. I’m not familiar with that area or whatever the case may be. So I would agree with you. I don’t think that they were disrupting the service. I thought that they were. I think it was just the audacity. that they felt and their indignation that they felt that, hey, how dare you, as Greta Thunberg would say, how dare you come within 500 feet of our compound and try to convert folks? I think that was the desire or the grievance behind of it more than you’re disturbing us because, you know, it doesn’t seem like they’re claiming that they just want them to stop. So I think it was just the how dare you kind of feeling that you shouldn’t be allowed to do this.

[Jay]

I think it’s more than that because Islam is a religion that dominates. And the Quran actually talks about jihad being a multi-step process depending on whether Muslims in a particular area have the numbers or the political power in order to execute their will. So if you are a minority in a country, or if you are in a position where legally, politically, you’re at a disadvantage, well, then your job is to acquiesce with the culture, go along to get along, don’t appear to be threatening, okay? And as your numbers grow and as your political power grows, then you begin to exhibit and do those things that we would normally associate with jihad, the cultural takeover, and in some cases, extremists take it to the violent. attacks in order to further their ideology and their gospel. And so one of the reasons I picked this article is because I think there needs to be a discussion in the West and among Christians about how we interact with, let’s say, engage Islam because there are certain countries and certain places in the world that are having a significant problem with the religion, primarily because of the extremists within that religion and the fact that the silent majority within Islam that will not go ahead and do the violent acts themselves, but are at the very least understanding of and at the very worst encouraging of their actions. And that’s something that I think is bonkers. There is a cultural element to it. That’s not necessarily spiritual, I mean, depending on who you’re talking to, but it is something that needs to be addressed because it’s clear that they don’t simply have plans to open a mosque. It’s not just a group of people wanting to practice their religion peacefully and quietly. They want to expand, they want to grow, they want to dominate. That’s something that Christians are going to have to come to terms with. Let’s take Christians off the table for a minute, for a second. That’s something that the West is going to have to come to terms with. bit of an anecdotal story. I recently went to Florida for a celebration, and the Airbnb that was rented was a part of a bunch of different Airbnbs. Like all of the houses in this particular subdivision belonged to a certain religion. We could tell because all of the houses, like every road in this subdivision had name that was tied to this particular religion. And right next door, there was an entire compound of their worship center, of a school, a training facility, all of these different things that were associated with this particular religion. And I thought, that’s very interesting, and not in a good way, that they would seek to establish dominance in that particular way. Now, what’s interesting is that many people would make the argument that Christians try to do the same thing. Christians establish schools and they establish all these different things and the culture is very heavily influenced by Christians, so why can’t other religions do the same thing? And I would argue and say, well, here’s the reason why. It’s because when those other religions become the dominant culture or the dominant, let’s say, purveyor of how we do law or whatever, then what happens at that point is the entire culture of your nation changes. The persecution will begin for Christians. Now, I understand that we’re living in a time that’s completely an anomaly for the church. For much of the history of the church, we’ve been a persecuted and minority group. But perhaps we need to wonder what things are going to look like if a religion hostile to Christ becomes the dominant culture. Now, people are going to listen to me and say, hey, you sound like a Christian nationalist, or you sound like a tinfoil hat, this or that or the other. I want to say that I’m not. However, I think that this is something that’s worth evaluating, let’s say, or discussing or mentioning even.

[MCG]

It might be, but I think it’s kind of beyond the scope of the article you read.

[Jay]

Also, the only reason I brought that up is because of their plans to expand into a compound, including thousand houses, medical centers, school, and all that sort of. It’s not too far beyond the pale there.

[MCG]

I got you. But at the same time, logically thinking if that was, let’s say, a Methodist church doing that, we will be okay with it.

[Jay]

Sure.

[MCG]

And I’m just simply saying, again, we are a country of laws and the same First Amendment that protects the Methodist is the same First Amendment that protects the Muslim. Again, I’m not depending Muslim because I understand what you’re saying. And on a secular level, on a cultural level, sure, I agree with you. But it’s a simply slope to say that they can’t have a compound If they pay for it, because again, we’re in a capitalist society.

[Jay]

Sure.

[MCG]

If they have the money and the means and there’s no laws against it.

[Jay]

They should be free to.

[MCG]

They can do it. I think rather than focus on the fact that they’re able to do that and they have the means to do that and what their outcome for the country would be, if they can do that, I think we should focus on the fact that, hey, why is it getting that way? Why is it that we are concerned about Muslim taking over or whatever other religion, insert religion, taking over. Could it be because Christians are not evangelizing being salt and light as they should be? And if we are and we’re winning the laws, that’s not the problem. You know, some of these people come from countries that Christians can’t go and share the gospel. God brought the mission field to us by the way of immigration and all these things, and yet we let down. let them come in and they never hear the gospel. We don’t share the gospel with them. Again, to some degree I can commend this church for trying to share the gospel with them. And our aim should be share the gospel with them. and try to win them to Christ, not trying to prevent them from doing things that the Constitution clearly say that they can do, because that was one of the founding principles of this nation, that it will be founded on freedom of religion. I think you can make a solid argument that religion was Christianity. However, even though we have moved away from the foundation, we still see the Constitution as the supreme law of the land. And I just can’t say, hey, it’s the supreme law of the land for me, But not for you Muslim, it has to be for them too. I think the way we need to focus on is on evangelism and not on what are they taking over or not taking over. Because if we can win them, I think that there won’t be a takeover.

[Jay]

I think we’re talking past each other because you’re talking the spiritual, I’m talking more the cultural, the practical. If you have a religion that will absolutely dominate and overturn the religion of the space that it’s in, and establish itself as the preeminent religion and then bar anyone else from practicing their religion, or at least make it incredibly difficult for them to do so. Okay, there is a spiritual side. I agree with you 100% what Christians ought to be doing in order to counter such. But when it comes to the cultural and perhaps the political, that’s something that the West is going to have to come to terms with. That’s something that the West is going to have to address. That’s all I’m bringing that up.

[MCG]

That’s true, but I don’t think we’re talking about each other. I think fact is that the spiritual is upstream of the cultural and the practical. So whatever the spiritual state is affects the culture, affects the practical. So I’m simply saying rather than aiming at the fruits, let’s go to the root. The root of this thing is spiritual. The only way it can be truly overturned is spiritual because it’s upstream of all these things. That’s why all countries in this, a lot of people say we don’t have a cultural issue of a spiritual issue. The politics of this nation today is not because politicians have gone bonkers. It’s because the spirituality of this country, we have moved away from a Judeo-Christian heritage foundation and that affect the politics, that affects the culture. That affects all those things. So I’m just simply saying, rather than shooting at the fruits, let’s go to the root. And the root of this is, in my opinion, spiritual. And the way we affect the spiritual is through evangelism. It’s through the preaching of the cross. The Bible says the Christians of the cross is to them that perish foolishness, but unto us that I save is the power of God. And I think that’s what this nation need, a more hellfire, pulpit-pounding, fiery preachers that will tell you about the dangers of hell and the glories of heaven and the fact that Jesus Christ came and down the cross for your sins. It’s not by instituting laws to sell Muslims that they can’t bail a compound. As much as I don’t want them to. I have to agree that the Constitution gives them all the same right to do that as it gives me as a Christian. I just think we have to attack it from the root, which is spiritual, rather than saying, hey, don’t do that.

[Jay]

I’m not sure if that was ever the argument, though. What I was saying was that I’m glad that the court overturned that ban.

[MCG]

I think we have gone well beyond that. As I was saying, I think it was a discussion for something else. But anyways, my third article, again, parents, this one is really out there.

[Jay]

So this is your second, right?

[MCG]

Yeah, this is my second article. Transgender baby killer released into Indiana community 30 years before the end of his 55 year sentence. And this is from Redox. A transgender identified male convicted of the grisly murder of an infant has been released on parole a full 30 years early. Jonathan Richardson, who now uses the name blank and blank was convicted in 2002 as the 11 month old stepdaughter died in his care while her mother was at work having served less than half of his 55 year sentence Richardson was quietly released in late December of 2025 a statement from the Vanderburgh County prosecutor’s office was published in March 26th of this year 2026 warning the community of Richardson present and stating that the Indiana Department of Corrections IDOC had failed to notify local officials of the release of a serious violent felon. Prosecutor Deanna Moray explained that the county prosecutor’s office was not made aware of the IDOC decision, but rather Richardson has been spotted by a local who recognized him. Without an official statement from the DOC. It is unclear why Richardson was released early. However, the decision may have been linked to an injunction granted in state court that required the IDOC to provide Richardson with taxpayer funded cosmetic surgeries.

[Jay]

Oh my word.

[MCG]

Releasing Richardson early may have been the IDOC strategy to avoid paying the court ordered cosmetic enhancement.

[Jay]

That’s insane.

[MCG]

So we have this guy who decided he’s going to take the life of his 11-month-year-old stepchild, sentenced to 55 years in jail, all of a sudden claimed to be transgendered, all of a sudden said that he needs his hardware and software to match each other. And the Department of Correction, Indiana Department of Correction say, No, we are paying for that. The court say, Yeah, wait, you’re paying for that. And IDOC say, Hey, well, watch us. Mr. Richardson, you’re free to go. Now, both sides are bunkers here.

[Jay]

Oh, yeah.

[MCG]

So you release a crazy guy who thinks he’s a woman, a baby murderer, because you don’t want to spend, let’s say, $50,000, $100,000 for him to align his hardware and his software. I’m telling you, you can’t make some of these things up. As previously reported by Redux in 2023, ACLU of Indiana file a legal complaint on the behalf of Richardson claiming that the IDOC was subjecting him again he can’t make these things up but ACLU said the IDOC was subjected him to cruel and unusual punishment by denying him the various plastic surgeries he had demanded this is cruel and unusual punishment my word All right. In the suit, the ACLU lawyers refer to Richardson as an adult transgender female prisoner confined in a male institution and complains that the total ban on gender affirming surgery violates his right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment. I can’t believe sometimes these lawyers make these arguments with straight faces. But anyways, among a list of demands prepared by Richardson and presented as evidence in the court was a document titled Surgeries to Reach my ideal self. The first item on the list, the court heard, was a female hardware.

[Jay]

That begins with a V and ends in an.

[MCG]

A. Followed by breast implants, a brow lift, a brow reduction, a tummy tuck, a glitterial implant, BBL, a uterus transplant, hair removal, and wigs.

[Jay]

What do you even say after that? In what universe is it the state’s responsibility to provide this This reprobate with these things.

[MCG]

However, during court proceeding, Richardson stated that he had amended his demands to two surgeries, an archi… What’s that word?

[Jay]

Orchiectomy.

[MCG]

Orchiectomy and a penile inversion. So basically, give me female hardware and whatever otiectomy means. I didn’t even look that up. But it’s not even important at this point. But both sides. All parties involved. The court, his lawyer, ACLU, of course, we know they’re bunkers anyway. The IDOC, everybody involved here is bunkers. In addition to identify as transgender, which is to identify as Muslim. We just talk about Muslim. I don’t think they would accept him, but anyways, and had launched a separate lawsuit against his prison chaplain for being denied a hijab. So clearly, this guy has lost not one, but a lot of marbles. During his disposition, Richardson told the legal counsel for the IDOC, Alex Carli, that in 2018, he had been informed about gender identity by another male inmate at CIF who went by the name of Pearl. So this guy was in jail during the cultural shift in the US. So he didn’t even know anything about transgenderism because he was in jail. He didn’t even know anything about Bruce Jenner and all these things that-.

[Jay]

Oh, I’m sure he heard about it.

[MCG]

That caused the shift. It was some inmate came in, I guess some other man by the name of Pearl, and educate him, and he found out, and he said, Oh, I can basically play the system. Yeah. That’s basically what it is. Anyways, according to resistance, Pearl had brought in pamphlets from California state prisons, of course, of course, where else? that explain the concept of gender identity I introduce him for the first time the idea of taking feminizing hormones I always knew I was a girl. Didn’t know that term applied because until I talked to Pearl, I didn’t even really know transgender was the name for it. I was hearing at the time that it was transsexualism and that didn’t seem to fit me because it was apparently people that liked to wear girl clothes to have certain things. However, Richardson also state that while briefly married to the mother of the infant he murdered, He had been working in an adult bookstore that sold crazy videos while employed as a janitor. Richardson would have crazy stuff with male customers while pretending to be a girl. Anyway, I’m not going to read any more of this because it goes into a whole lot of dirty stuff that he’s talking about. Apparently he has an OnlyFan and all that stuff. It goes into way too much details for my comfort. So I’m not going to read anymore. I’m not going to get our audience into that, but oh my world.

[Jay]

The fact that the court system, that the police, the ACLU, well, let’s not even put the ACLU in this, but the fact that our institutions would take any of this as seriously as they did the degree that they released this mem is beyond the pale. At some point, this has to stop. I think this ties back to the previous bonkers that we just discussed about, you know, Christians kind of putting their foot down against certain necrotizing influences in our culture that absolutely need to be stopped. Not everyone needs to have an opinion. Not everyone. I know I sound anti-American when I say this or non-American when I say this, but not everyone can open up their mouths and share this opinion that it has the effect of infecting with disease, with terrible thought processes, with all kinds of darkness. their ideology. There are certain things that we don’t need to discuss. It doesn’t need to be an open exchange of ideas. There are certain things that are blatantly and obviously demonic of the devil and that need to be shut down. This is one of them. Also, the consumption of sexual material. We’re talking about the P word and all kinds of degeneracy and that sort of thing. There’s no room for discussion on these. I don’t care. This is going to sound terrible. I don’t care what the Constitution says. That’s not free speech. That’s not freedom of expression. That’s sin. And it’s a sin that pollutes and deteriorates a culture, a people that needs to be like this. Okay, let me gather myself. This is an audio podcast and so you’re not going to be able to see the picture, but there is a picture in this article of this particular man. He’s not a woman. This man, I’m not even going to say this person, this man pretending to be a woman. He is in a very, let’s say, immodest and promiscuous sort of position, showing body parts that he’s not supposed to. And there’s a quote imposed on top of it from Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. that says, Darkness cannot drive out darkness. Only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate. Only love can do that. So many people, now, if I could backtrack and say that I am one that looks at Martin Luther King with an intense sigh I think he was a wolf in sheep’s clothing and he should not have the place in our history that he does. But that’s for another podcast, that’s for another discussion. This is the problem with Christians in the culture that are willing to seed. ground to the enemy, cede institutions, cede the, what is it, public discourse, when it comes to this particular issue. Because they’re afraid to be called names like homophobic or transphobic or whatever phobia that they want to place on people, because we’re afraid to be called these names, we hesitate, we refuse to open up our mouths and say thus saith the Lord at the risk of being offensive at the risk of being forward and direct about sin Christianity as a whole in this country has ceded ground to the enemy so much so that they feel comfortable taking this particular quote from a man which I am convinced is a wolf in sheep’s clothing, but they take this quote and they twist the meaning of words. So they can say that because they’re being put upon or they’re being singled out or they’re being called out for their degeneracy, for their reprobation. Is that even a word? Anyway, that’s darkness. And so they’re the victim. And if you dare tell me what thus saith the Lord, you’re the one being intolerant. You’re the one being a bigot or fill in the blank. So darkness now becomes light and light now becomes darkness. And the Bible is clear that woe to them that call darkness light and light darkness. Woe to them that invert God’s creation and what God instituted at the beginning. And so I think that Christians absolutely need to speak up. and speak out about this, and don’t be afraid of what they’ll call you. Don’t be afraid of their faces, the Bible says.

[MCG]

Well, there’s a lot of things going to my mind on this. Firstly, even though the Indiana Department of Corrections may not have publicly said why they released this guy, what is it, 30 years before his sentence should be up, it’s clear that, at least to me, that is the lawsuits. the money so they have to pay lawyers to defend themselves it seems like the way and I would imagine that Indiana is more of a red state than a blue state yeah I would I would imagine that the judges over there will probably lean a little bit more on the side of the Department of Corrections but I don’t know if it’s going to take the Supreme Court because I don’t know how telling someone no we’re not going to pay for you to change your quote unquote gender. You can’t, but quote unquote change your gender amounts to cruel and unusual punishment. I don’t think that is constitutionally protected. Of course, because you talk about cruel and unusual punishment, but that’s not one of them.

[Jay]

Right.

[MCG]

And then, of course, so they’re spending money on the lawyers, and now they’re looking at, based on his list, and then he said, oh, that’d be generous. Just give me two of them, all three.

[Jay]

How magnanimous of you. Oh, brother.

[MCG]

and whatever the case may be. So tell me, where do we draw the line? Because when more and more people with gender dysphoria or let’s call it what it is, most likely mental issues decide, oh, I am here, I’m working a regular job, I’m making 80, $90,000 per year, and I want to have an whatever we call it, whatever it is.

[Jay]

In fact, let me Google it while you talk.

[MCG]

Removal of the.

[Jay]

Mail hardware?

[MCG]

Yes, let’s put it that way.

[Jay]

Oh.

[MCG]

That produce the male gametes.

[Jay]

Okay.

[MCG]

It’s a removal of that.

[Jay]

Okay.

[MCG]

And so I’m working a regular job. I have this mental stuff going on within me. I want to do a surgery. The doctor quote me $50,000. I don’t have that. I don’t want to go into debt for that. What will stop me from, let’s say, going to a convenience store and take something I shouldn’t take or whatever the case may be, get a year in jail and a month in demand to have these things happen on taxpayers dime. And then when I come out of great, I was able to get $80,000 worth of surgery free. I wouldn’t put it past them. to go into jail for a little bit. Didn’t Brandon Manning or whatever his name is? I think he goes by Chelsea Manning now.

[Jay]

Oh, yeah.

[MCG]

Didn’t he demand all these things when he was in federal prison?

[Jay]

He did as well, yes.

[MCG]

It’s just, you know, I don’t think that prison should be paying for these things. I think the only thing prison should be paying for when it comes to medical stuff is things that will keep you alive. So in my opinion, if the surgery will keep you alive and you’re not going to die, the prison pray for the surgery. If it’s selective, elective, or whatever kind of surgery that has nothing to do with you dying, then no, you have to pay for it yourself. But they would also make the argument if you pass that law, they’ll make the argument that because of the mental health and all these things, blah, blah, blah, blah, it’s a life and death situation too. So you’re not going to win with these people.

[Jay]

You know, this is not some… man who, now I’m not saying that the way the baby died one way or the other, one way is better than the other. I’m not saying that at all. However, here’s what I’m saying. This wasn’t a situation where, you know, he accidentally dropped the baby and she died as a result of her trauma. This wasn’t a situation where it was an accident. He, with his own hands, strangled that child until she died. He killed her with his own hands. This is already someone. Now, I’m not saying that murderers are beyond the pale or beyond God’s ability to save. I’m not saying that. What I am saying is that this is someone who murdered a child, a baby, and is now using all of this ridiculous nonsense and rhetoric in order to pursue some type of just reprobate desire that he has as well as to get a leg up in the judicial system, in the legal system in order to get out. I think that probably has a part to do with it as well.

[MCG]

You know the sad thing about it?

[Jay]

It worked.

[MCG]

It worked.

[Jay]

It worked.

[MCG]

He’s out. Anyways, you listen to the Moving Barrows podcast. We’re in the middle of another bonkers episode. And if you’ve been listening this far, you will agree. It is bonkers. We will 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 lay person, 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. 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 slash donate. Removing barriers, a clear view of the cross.

[MCG]

All right, Jay, what’s your second article?

[Jay]

My second article, I’m gonna make this quick because it’s just a really sad story. Ex-Virginia Lieutenant Governor Justin Fairfax kills his wife and himself amid divorce proceedings, police say. Now, this happened earlier in the year in April in Annandale, Virginia. Justin Fairfax, a former lieutenant governor of Virginia, fatally shot his wife before he died by suicide in their home overnight, police said. Justin and Serena Fairfax’s teenage children were at the house at the time of the shootings. Fairfax County Police Chief Kevin Davis told reporters that he shot and killed his wife inside of their home and then he shot and killed himself, adding that their oldest son was the one to call 911 just before midnight. Fairfax was once considered a political up-and-comer, and he was going through a messy divorce with his wife, very contentious, very messy divorce with his wife. He had recently lost custody of the children. And sadly, we see that it’s culminated to this news article here. Davis describes the shootings as apparently part of a domestic dispute surrounding what seems to be a complicated or messy divorce. The couple were still living together but sleeping in separate bedrooms. Police were, at the time of the article, in the preliminary stages of the investigation and that Justin Fairfax was recently served paperwork indicating when he was scheduled to appear in court for the next divorce proceedings. That may have been a spark the police chief said, adding that detectives will figure that out as they investigate what led to the tragedy. And so they have a search warrant to collect evidence, to search the house, to recover evidence, including the firearm, etc. And so the reason I brought up this particular article is that, yes, it is bonkers that someone of a high political position would go so far as to kill his wife and then kill himself. But I think the angle that I would like to come at this with is the fact that it’s bonkers bunkers that the legal and political system in the United States can be weaponized to attack men, right? But if you’re a woman, or like our last bunkers, if you’re a trans woman, if that’s even a thing, the system in many ways will bend over to make accommodation for you. Now, I’m not in any way pointing a finger at Serena Fairfax. That’s not what I’m trying to do. What I’m trying to show in this particular article is that what Justin Fairfax was experiencing and what was happening to him, in many cases what he did to himself, happens many, many, many, many, many times over in the United States where Marriages are broken, homes are broken up, there’s a custody dispute, legal battles, divorce proceedings, and more often than not, men get the very short end of the stick in the eyes of the law. They’re required to pay significant amounts of child support, alimony, etc. In many cases, they’re not able to see and interact with their children as much as they would like to. Almost always, custody goes to the mother. Not always, but in most cases, the mother gets custody, the mother gets money, the mother gets all of these different things, and men are left holding the bag. And this has been going on for many, many, many years. I think that speaking overall, it’s left many men demoralized. nihilistic even. They throw up their hands and they wonder what’s the point. Women have weaponized the legal system against their husbands and against the men in their lives so that even young men today are wondering, hey, what’s the point of getting married? Why get married?

[MCG]

Well, I’m not sure.

[Jay]

I’m not saying that this, okay, there were many, many women. You go ahead and I’ll finish what I was gonna say. Go ahead.

[MCG]

I’m not sure this quite is in line with what you’re saying. Firstly, Yes, 80% of the divorce are initiated by women. But quite honestly, a lot of men are more than willing to, in court in divorce settlement, to let the kids be with their mother. Because the mother is, let’s face the fact, the mother is a nurturer. She’s more, whatever the case may be, I think that’s the God-given order. that the woman nurture, the father, they play different roles. And when they’re splitting up, a lot of men are quite honestly more than willing to say, hey, let the children stay with the mother. I was just listening to a guy going through a divorce and he went to his wife, well, they didn’t divorce, but was talking about a divorce. And the first thing he told his wife was, I’m happy to give you the house for you and the kids. A lot of men are willing to give that up because they realize that they may not be able to give the kids. as much as the mother way in terms of taking care of the kid, cooking, blah, blah, blah, blah, whatever the case may be, traditional stuff. Anyways, when it comes to Justin Fairfax and his wife, I think this is totally different. Yes, his wife may have stuff, but I think we need to step back a little bit further. Why is it that this was such an issue? Let’s say for Justin Fairfax, because he seems to be the crazy one here that kill his wife and kill himself. Why was this such an issue? I don’t think it’s because he was going through a divorce because these folks are Democrats. They don’t, they don’t. As a matter of fact, it doesn’t matter. Republican, Democrats, today’s society, divorce is just another Tuesday. Divorce in this country is just another day, just like any other day. People get divorced all the time. People marriages fail all the time in this country. Children not split up all the time in this country. From what I understand, he was in serious amount of financial issues. So I don’t think any of this had to do with it. I think this is the issue with it. I think it is status in the society and political aspiration that led to this.

[Jay]

Well, he lost it. He lost all of that, the standing.

[MCG]

But why? Because how many presidents do you know that are not married or don’t have a wife? Donald Trump was the only one, the only president in the last, what, how many years who have been divorced? Because in today’s society, We still look down on it and they even make Donald Trump third marriage an issue. I know what I’m saying is that I’m not even defending Donald Trump morally. I won’t defend Donald Trump at all, especially morally. But they made that an issue. Usually, if you’re running for politics and Justin Fairfax, I believe, had an aspiration to become the governor of Virginia.

[Jay]

Sure.

[MCG]

And then maybe beyond the government of Virginia, maybe in federal offices, who knows, he probably could have even run for president. He was a young guy. He was even 50 yet, I think.

[Jay]

It was a political blow for him.

[MCG]

Exactly.

[Jay]

It got in the way of his political aspirations, no doubt. This is why I’m not coming at…

[MCG]

So that’s why I’m saying I don’t think his doom is doing anything to him. And I think…

[Jay]

That’s why I said at the beginning that I’m not coming at this particular article from that angle. The things that are happening to him, I’m not saying that he had nothing left to live for and that’s why he killed his wife and kids or his wife and himself. Because his political…

[MCG]

career was over because now he can’t present himself as a family guy, reading his case. He can’t look all innocent and sweet when there’s a woman out there accusing him of being a terrible person. Not only Jack, when Justin Fairfax was running for lieutenant governor of Virginia. There was a bunch of women came out and accused him of all kinds of stuff when he was in college or when he was fresh on the political trail in terms of just getting into politics. And I think he was supporting the Obama campaign or whatever the case may be. There was a bunch of women come out and say, Justin Favours did all kinds of stuff to them.

[Jay]

So I’m not defending him. What I’m saying is that you take his particular situation and he ended up feeling completely like he had nowhere else to go. I’m taking everything that happened here and I’m applying it to men across the US who probably feel the exact same way. Now, a majority of them are not going to pick up a gun and kill their wives and kill themselves. What I am saying is that when men are going through divorce in this country, more often than not, they’re getting the short end of the stick. You said something very interesting. You said that most men would want their kids to stay with their mom. Right? But we also say in the same breath that if there’s no father in the home, the kids are X amount, a percent more likely to be involved in sinful lifestyle, crime, less likely to be successful, et cetera. We can’t have both. We can’t say both.

[MCG]

I think you totally misunderstand what I’m saying. I’m not saying, I’m not defending divorce. I’m not defending.

[Jay]

No, I’m not saying you are.

[MCG]

Let me explain. I’m not defending fatherless homes. I’m just simply saying when it comes to the point of divorce where the homies are already breaking up, most men, if they’re being honest, is not going to want to have the kid 24-7 like the mother would.

[Jay]

I don’t think that’s what’s happening here.

[MCG]

No, I’m not saying, I’m not saying.

[Jay]

Any people are fighting for their kids and many of them are shot down by the court.

[MCG]

I’m playing it with a broad brush, a generalization. If I, God forbid, go into a divorce, I would fight to have my kids. I would want to have my kids in my life. But I’m simply saying there’s a lot of men out there who would have the mother, especially if the child is five years old or whatever, talking about the formative years of the child, would want to be their mother. And a lot of children, when they’re at certain age and the family is going through divorce, a lot of the time the court will give the children a choice. Who do you want to be with? Who do you want to stay with? Most of them say, I want to stay with my mother. A lot of times the man will say, hey, I will gladly take them on weekends, let them stay with their mother and go to school and may be. So I’m just simply looking at it in a way that a lot of men, if we’re honest, will not want the responsibility of the day-to-day grind with the kid and work because the man going to think, I’m going to have to go to work because I’m going to have to make more money for our money. I’m going to make more money for child support. I’m going to make more money. Sometimes they have to support two households in terms of mortgages or whatever the case may be because they may have to still be paying the mortgage at the home their family in and they have to move out and pay. A lot of men want to go out there and grind and be able to support all the financial issues coming towards them, rather than waking up at 5:00 in the morning, getting the kid ready for school, dropping them off of school, heading to work, picking them back up. A lot of men are not going to want to do that. They’re going to say, hey, let them stay with their mother. I could be wrong on that, but I think as a man, I believe that a lot of men would go that way. I’m not saying some would not fight to get their kid, especially if the mother is crazy. I’m not saying that, but I’m simply saying, generally speaking, a lot of men, I don’t think it’s just a court. Yes, the court discriminate against men a lot. just reading about the divorce of someone I know. I was going through the public available papers and it was crazy. There weren’t even any kid involved in this. And the woman got the better end of the stick in this divorce. So I think it’s just the court system are normally more favorable towards women. One, because the woman did the fairer or weaker sex, but also because a lot of men are willing to say, hey, that’s my kid. I will gladly pay for them to have a comfortable life and I will get a one video apartment. some place and survive. I don’t think it’s just necessarily the courts at fault, the woman at fault, and the man is an innocent victim here. I think sometimes a lot of men would give that up gladly so that the mother of the child can take care of the child.

[Jay]

And I’m saying that we shouldn’t be so quick to assume that the women are innocent victims here either. The women absolutely weaponize the courts and the legal system to go after men. And that’s something that needs to be looked at as well. Now, this whole Me Too thing where every time it It seems like a guy is going to come up for some political position. Women come out of the woodwork saying one thing or another. And I am not one to automatically disbeliever or poke holes at the arguments that women put up if something nefarious happened decades ago. I’m not saying automatically you’re lying, who wants to trust you? But what I am saying is that while we can say that unwanted sexual contact absolutely takes place, there are also times where it wasn’t unwanted and that this is more of a case of, man, I wish I hadn’t done that. Let me say otherwise so that I can fight back. I’m not saying that this is the case.

[MCG]

That’s a totally different argument though.

[Jay]

This falls under the umbrella of women today weaponizing the legal system against men. And I’m not saying I’m saying that’s something that we need to start taking into account because I’m not entirely sure that the current way that the legal system is set up takes that into account enough. And I think that a lot of unsavory, ungodly women are wising up to the fact that they can use the system in order to get back at their men for whatever reason. And if we’re going to be a just society, that’s something that ought to be looked at is all I’m saying. Now, I’m not saying that the women that came out and accused Justin Fairfax are somehow lying or it’s not true. I’m not saying that at all. I’m just saying that we need to look at the situation in its entirety.

[MCG]

Yeah, I see what you’re saying, but I just don’t see how this have anything at all to do with Justin Fairfax and his wife and him murdering his wife and killing himself.

[Jay]

And I hope it doesn’t come across like I’m justifying the fact that he you know, killed his wife and killed himself either. That’s not what I’m trying to say at all either.

[MCG]

I don’t think you’re trying to say that, but I don’t see the connection or correlation between women taking advantage and all that stuff. I think this is a tragic situation where a man realizing now that basically his career is over because he no longer can pose himself as whatever the case may be. Look at Hillary Clinton and Bill Clinton. I don’t even think these people have a marriage, but they’re still on paper married, right? Why? Because staying together is more advantageous for the political career. That’s basically what it comes down to.

[Jay]

Or for the assets that they were able to acquire in the marriage.

[MCG]

That’s what it comes down to. So Justin Fairfax is trying to build something, trying to become the governor of Virginia, trying to expand his political stuff, and also at the same time a tyrant. And I think we can say he’s a tyrant based on the fact that he and I’m gonna kill his wife again himself. And the woman say, hey, I’ve had enough. You’re knucklehead, you’re, you know, you’re not a good father. You’re not a good husband. I’m leaving. And all of a sudden, he realized his world is crumbling before him, and he snapped or whatever and stuff. And it’s interesting that he snapped only a week or two before he had to move out and before everything was going to be final, because he realized there’s no hope. I don’t think this has anything to do with me too. It has nothing to do with whether the judge give the mother. I think this is all about manly pride.

[Jay]

In his case, absolutely.

[MCG]

Yes. How the mighty has fallen is this about? You were once the lieutenant governor of Virginia. You had this aspiring career. You were one of the prominent up-and-coming Democrat. And all of a sudden, you’re going to do a divorce. That’s going to lower your stuff. How many divorced men do we see in these things? Single men, yes, but divorced men.

[Jay]

Divorced men, not so much. And no one’s arguing any of those points. All I’m saying is that what you saw happening in that particular instance happens many times a year over these continental United States, and men are feeling Like, there’s no hope. Nihilistic. It’s over. I’m done. Why fight? And I don’t think that it’s good for a society to have a bunch of nihilistic men.

[MCG]

Well, we can agree on that without saying that the courts and the women are causing it.

[Jay]

No, no, no, no. I didn’t.

[MCG]

I think we have kicked that enough. I’ll let the listeners decide. Anyways, my third article is from the New York Post. Concern SoCal Woman. reveals terrifying fallout from registering her pet boxer to vote. Talking about the save act, huh?

[Jay]

Her pet what?

[MCG]

Boxer.

[Jay]

As in the dog? Mm-hmm.

[MCG]

Oh, goodness. Talking about the save act. A California woman who registered her dog to vote says she did it to reform lax voting rules. A California woman who registered her dog to vote says she did it to reform lax voting rules. As the push for voter ID to stamp out voter fraud gains momentum, Laura Urex, I’m not quite sure if I’m saying her last name correctly there, registered her boxer, Maya, to vote during the 2020 election. She says to reveal vulnerabilities in the state’s voter registration system, a weakness critics have long warned about but say has gone largely on a jest. And of course, this happened where California, or California is something. she thought it would lead to reform but instead has turned into a nightmare with her now facing charges related to voter fraud it’s something lawmakers at both the state and federal level are working to adjust by requiring voter ID and proof of citizenship in Washington the proposed save act would force Americans to prove their citizenship in person to register and show ID even for mail-in ballots meanwhile in California A Republican backed ballot initiative aiming for 2026 would require a photo ID for in-person voting and a stricter verification for mail ballots. If somebody had looked at it, if somebody did something about it, but nobody cares, Urex told the Post, explaining she immediately contacted election officials when her pet received a mail in ballot. The Orange County woman said she was first alarmed after six voter registration cards showed up at her home, despite only two eligible voters living there. I think that’s really what kind of set me off. We have two people living in this house, my husband and I, and we got six cars to register the vote, she said. I was like, well, that’s ridiculous. Well, I have questions on that, you know, how long have you living at a home? Did you recently buy the home? Maybe. The last family that owned the home, there were four of them living there. Who knows?

[Jay]

Yeah, we’re still getting mail from the previous owners here.

[MCG]

Not as much, though, but we do occasionally.

[Jay]

Yeah.

[MCG]

So U-Rex decided to test the system by seeing if she could register her dog and be sent a ballot. If you look at the actual form that I sent in, it’s literally a made-up name. made-up birthday no social security number at all she said the only thing that was real on it was my address weeks later Maya received a mail-in ballot G said she immediately contact the Orange County Register of Voters to report what had happened but claims no one responded she said she repeatedly tried to alert officials between 2020 and 2025 even reaching out to former Hutchinton Beach City attorney Michael Gates through a friend I’ve given my picture of Maya and her ballot and given my phone number and would never hear from anybody, Urex explained. It is not something I just gave up on. I kept trying to get someone to pay attention to it. It’s not like they finally discover it. It’s that I kept pushing until somebody paid attention. When investigators finally contacted her in August 2025, she thought action was finally being taken. I remember the first words out of my mouth when she said, hi, we’re looking for your dog being registered to vote. Literally, the first words out of my mouth were, thank God, finally, someone’s looking into this, Yorick said. Instead, prosecutors hit her five, I guess that should be wit. Instead, prosecutor hit her with five charges, including felony count of procuring or offering a false or forged document to be filled. Two felony counts of casting a ballot when not entitled to vote, and a felony count of registering a non-existent person to vote. A rich country official said Maya was not only registered to vote, but to cast ballots in 2021, given material recall, and a 2022 primary. though the latter was challenged and rejected. On April 10th, four felony charges were dismissed, while the remaining count of registering a non-existent person was reduced to a misdemeanor. I really didn’t feel like anybody wanted to do anything about it, but because of the way it went about bringing it to their attention, I don’t think they had a choice, Jurek said. Her sentencing is scheduled for October. The case now sits at the center of a broader political battle over election security in California. On the current state law, voters are not required to show ID when casting a ballot. Identification is typically provided at the registration stage, while mailing ballots rely on signature verification rather than voter ID. Organizations behind the Republican backed proposal statewide voter ID initiative say they have guided more than 1.3 million signatures to qualify the measure for the 2026 ballots. There’s fraud going on, you know, it may be small, but it doesn’t take a lot of votes to change the outcome. of the election, Riverside County rep Kevin Calvert told the Post. This is not a radical idea. Americans use an idea every day of their life. This is something that just makes common sense. I think I’m going to stop there.

[Jay]

So she registered her dog to vote to prove how unsecure the elections are and got in trouble for it.

[MCG]

You know what? Let me say this. I admire her courage. However, you don’t break the law. trying to prove the law is ineffective or whatever the case may be, whatever her goal was, I admire her courage. Would I have done something like that? I would not, because I’m not going to put my freedom on the line just so I can show my elected officials that the way they’re doing stuff at the time. I will say this, when I was in college, coming from the islands, being placed into a college atmosphere with food that I wasn’t accustomed to or wasn’t maybe, let me say, cook to the standard that I’m accustomed to. I’m accustomed to my island cooking and my island food. Coming to a different type of food and different type of cuisines was a little bit challenging. So when I go to the dining hall, if I find something I actually like to eat, I will just take a whole bunch of it and skip over everything else. So they had this, I think they were chicken tenders or something like that. And apparently these were popular because you go to the dining hall And they have signs above them that you only can take three at a time. So you take three, then you have to go back in the line and take three more. And they take three more. Okay, fine rule. I got to the dining hall. I was the only person there for about 5 minutes. I was trying to hustle so I can get to class. I had like six or seven of them on my plate. And someone from the dining hall looked at me and said, you can’t take more than that. And I look around, there was literally no one else in the dining hall. It was like right after chapel or something and no one else was there yet. I was like, are you serious? So, okay, I progress. I make sure there’s only three on my plate. I go to my table, I put my plate down, go back in the line, take another plate, put three on the plate, put my plate down, go back in the line, take another plate, put three on the plate. And now I have nine. And the person look at me like, are you serious? I’m like, are you serious? So I can understand sometimes we have rules that are dumb. I can understand, you know, laws that are dumb. In their case, if the line was 20 deep or even five deep, and they say to me, hey, three at a time and go back in the line, I can understand. But if I’m the only person there, why is it a big deal if I just take seven or eight at a time at once so I don’t want to come back? This is what this lady was doing here. This lady saying, hey, this is dumb law. Y’all don’t check these things. Y’all don’t check IDs or whatever the case may be. So let me prove a point by registering my dog. The difference with me, I wasn’t breaking the law. Registering your dog is breaking the law. Even if you’re trying to prove a dumb law, it’s breaking the law. So look, I can’t complain about her being charged, but hopefully her point was taken and hopefully they’re going to be changed. And of course, we know we did an episode on the Save American Act and hopefully we can have that passed because I don’t understand why voter ID requirements is so controversial. Actually, it’s not, because 80 70% of the population wants it. It’s only the Democrats party don’t want it, but even 70 70% of Democrats want it. So the leadership of the Democrats don’t want it, but the people under them want it. So, hey, what can I say? You prove your point. I give you A plus for bravery, for doing it. But at the same time, I’m glad it was reduced to a misdemeanor, and maybe they will just sign you and let you go. But at the same time, you just put your freedom on the line because you want to prove something. I would probably go to a town hall and do something else rather than blatantly break the law. And not only that, you broke the law, and then you expose yourself by calling them… Anyways.

[Jay]

I think this is classic two wrong is don’t make a right sort of thing. Oh, brother. Well.

[MCG]

Do you have a final one?

[Jay]

I do have a final one. I’ll make it quick. This one is from SciTech Daily. 20 million year old rhino fossil rewrites evolutionary history. Ancient proteins from a 20 million year old rhino tooth are transforming our understanding of evolution. Researchers have made a major breakthrough in understanding rhino evolution by analyzing proteins extracted from a fossilized tooth that is over 20 million years old. By examining these ancient protein sequences, scientists discovered that this prehistoric rhino separated from other members of the rhino family during the middle Aeocene or Oligocene, is that how it’s pronounced?

[MCG]

I have no idea.

[Jay]

Oligocene period, approximately 41 to 25 million years ago. Now I know that our scientifically informed audience are probably cringing at my inability to pronounce the different epochs of evolutionary history, but you know what I can do? I can look at this particular article and see that proteins or even pieces of proteins can’t be millions of years old. That’s what I can do. and I’m not the sharpest tool in the shed. I find it bonkers that we are continually finding evidence of proteins, of prehistoric animals, not just rhinos, but T-rexes, various dinosaurs, etc. And we’re still holding on to this millions of years nonsense. The finding also offered new insight into when the two main branches of the rhino family, these are names that I cannot even begin to pronounce, but it’s the taxonomic name of these particular species. When these two branches of the rhino family, let’s say, split from one another, the evidence points to a more recent divergence during the Oligocene about 32 to 22 million years ago. than previous fossil-based studies had indicated. Okay, so you find this rhino tooth with protein in it, and when you put it through all of your rigorous scientific testing, etc., you find that the family branches separated a lot later down the line than you would suspect. In other words, it happened more recently. In other words, Not millions of years? Maybe? Possibly? Is that a possibility, scientific community, that we’re not talking millions of years here? Maybe the Bible is right. Not maybe, but just for your sake. Maybe the Bible is right when it’s said that this happened only thousands of years ago. Maybe there was a worldwide flood that buried massive amounts of life rapidly in sedimentary layers, preserved them. They were fossilized very quickly, maybe what the Bible said actually happened. Their successful recovery and analysis of enamel proteins marks a significant leap in molecular paleontology, extending the known limit for evolutionary protein preservation to a time frame 10 times older than the most ancient DNA ever recovered. In other words, we can’t let go of this millions of years. It must be that the proteins can actually last longer than we initially thought. Not that these proteins are young It’s just that they can last a lot longer than we thought. Not just 10s of millions of years, or hundreds of thousands of years, but several 10s of millions of years. The team at York was involved in confirming that the proteins and amino acids were genuinely ancient. They went through this entire test in order to make sure that the protein that was found on the tooth was not a result of… of a contamination, like protein laid down on the tooth from subsequent exposure, maybe dead things or whatever. So whatever protein they found on the tooth was organic to the tooth itself. Dr. Mark Dickinson, the co-author and postdoctoral researcher of the University of York’s Department of Chemistry, said that, quote, it is phenomenal that these tools are enabling us to explore further and further back in time. Building on our knowledge of ancient proteins, we can now start asking fascinating new questions about the evolution of ancient life on our planet. I just find it bonkers that we’re finding more and more evidence that debunks evolutionary theory. And yet, they refuse to acknowledge it. They got to hold on to those millions of years. It can’t possibly be that the Bible is true. It’s just that there’s something about these proteins that we didn’t know about before.

[MCG]

Well, let’s call evolution what it is, a religion, and don’t want to give up their religion that easily. So case in point, I was at the door recently talking to this guy. And the conversation quickly went to science and evolution and all this stuff. And he was basically coughing at me, basically, you know, smiling. Can’t believe you believe those things that you’re saying. I told him evolution is a religion. He said, no, it’s not. It’s science and it’s this and that. And I said, well, in order for you to be scientific, he has to be meet all these criterias and stuff like that. Evolution means none of them. He said, what you believe in it is faith. I said, yes. I would gladly admit that I I believe I have faith, but I will also summarize that evolution requires faith too. He said, no, it’s not. And he go on and he kind of go back and forth having a more of a intellectual conversation, even though I don’t think I’m capable of such, but having that conversation back and forth. And I said to him, you know, it comes down to this, you believe that there’s an eternal God who created everything or you believe in eternal matter. And he said to me, where did God come from? And I said, you know, he doesn’t have a beginning on any, he’s eternal, you know. So I said to him, where does matter come from? And he said to me, he doesn’t have a beginning nor ending. And I said, you see, that’s fate. And he gave me this stupid smile. When I said that, I wanted to say, got you. But I didn’t say.

[Jay]

Did you restrain yourself?

[MCG]

But I didn’t say that at all. I just said, that’s fate. I didn’t think he realized it. He didn’t necessarily acknowledge it verbally. I think his facial expression kind of say yes, realize that what you just expressed is fate. That’s their fate. and they believe it. So as bonkers as you might be, and unscientificate may be, that’s their fate.

[Jay]

Well, we are homeschooling our children and we have one that is very, very interested in science. And so I look forward to becoming less of a dummy in this particular realm. I’d like to study and learn more about the scientific processes that these scientists use in order to come up with their theories and to come up with the things that they say support their theories, because I really do think that I would really like to know what is it that prevents them? What is the barrier? This is removing barriers. What is the barrier that makes it so that they absolutely can’t let go of those millions of years? What is it?

[MCG]

The barrier is the god of science. so-called.

[Jay]

Yeah, that’s my third article there.

[MCG]

What’s your dishonorable mentioned?

[Jay]

My dishonorable mention, I only have one. It’s actually really sad. Well, I have two. One is crazy and one is sad. There is a rapper whose nephew immediately killed himself when he accidentally shot his sister in the neck. His sister was 11, he was 14. I guess they were playing with a gun that was found unsecured in the house. And so he accidentally shot her and was so overwhelmed, so overwrought that he immediately killed himself. And that is just sad and terrible. First that weapons were unsecured in the house and that they had access to them, but also that he would come to such, first that the accident would happen, that he would shoot her and kill her, but then immediately make the decision to end his own life. So in one day, the mother loses two of her children. It’s just a terrible and sad story that took place. The second one happened in Florida. What is it about Florida man in the news? There’s these two drunk men at a dock. I guess they were fighting. One man shoves the other. He falls down, hits his head, and is gravely injured, actually. Apparently, certain vertebrae either shattered or something happened to where it cut arteries and he was unconscious. And the guy that was fighting him didn’t call police or anything. He just pushed the body into the water and walked away. And I’m not laughing because it’s funny. I’m wondering, even if you’re impaired, what in the world makes you think it’s okay? to throw somebody’s body in the water and not call for medical attention. I don’t know if maybe he panicked and he thought, oh no, I’m gonna be in trouble for this. And he tried to get rid.

[MCG]

Are they drunk or something?

[Jay]

They were both drunk apparently. They’re both drunk. I don’t know. Well.

[MCG]

I think it’s a situation where… make it look like a drowning and maybe I won’t be charged with murder or manslaughter or something.

[Jay]

Well, he was impaired. Well, he told the police I didn’t know what to do. I just wanted to get away from him. Well, why didn’t you run? Why would you try?

[MCG]

I think you might be the bunkers one to expect drunken people to act rationally, but.

[Jay]

That is definitely the case. I was also the one earlier in the day making connections where apparently there were no connections to be made. So that’s probably I’m the bunkers one. The third one I have is this whole situation going on with mom Danny in New York. where it seems to me like he’s antagonizing the Jewish population there. New York Jewish leaders call on Mamdani to stop fanning flames of hatred and division after the stabbings that took place, the UWS stabbings, but he only offers a canned response, and he’s even increased his rhetoric. I don’t know if you’ve heard him talking about Benjamin Netanyahu, how he’s gonna look into seeing if New York has the jurisdiction or the authority to arrest him for war crimes or international crime that he committed. Of course, he had to walk that back and say that New York has no authority and no jurisdiction to do that. But also this muted response he has to some of the things that are happening in New York, antagonizing a particular group of people, even encouraging people to protest against Netanyahu. Like in a city like New York, really? Did he not remember what was happening in the summer of love? Encouraging your constituents to protest? Come on, man. That’s bonkers. But that’s neither here nor there. That’s probably an episode all by itself there. Those are my 3 dishonorable mentions there.

[MCG]

All right, I have two dishonorable mentions. University of Washington women’s soccer team played a high school boys squad. And you will never guess who won is the title of the article. Well, since this is from Fox News, since Fox News said that I would never guess who won, I will not try to guess who won this match. But I know where I would put my money.

[Jay]

Where would you put your money?

[MCG]

Well, it says University of Washington women’s soccer team played a high school boys squad. you know what? I’m a man, so I think I’m just going to kind of just stick with my gender and say, I’ll go with all the dogs, the boys.

[Jay]

Oh.

[MCG]

I’ll go with all the dogs.

[Jay]

That’s sexist. That’s misogynist.

[MCG]

I’ll put my money there on the boys and say that if the boys win, I can maybe get 10 times what I put down. But.

[Jay]

Why don’t you believe all women?

[MCG]

Well, obviously the woman got to win because they’re grown women at a college playing high school boys. So we’ll see. You can check that out on Fox News and you can tell me who won.

[Jay]

Oh, they haven’t played yet?

[MCG]

No, I’m just kidding.

[Jay]

They haven’t really played. Okay, I missed it. Okay.

[MCG]

Them lawmakers say Constitution bar police from stopping her after alleged 100 mph speeding. So this is a Democratic lawmaker saying that the Constitution, I think this is out of, I don’t know what state it is. I probably should pull it up. But this is out of Connecticut, I think. And she is a member of the House in Connecticut or something, which she’s a legislature of some sort in Connecticut. And let me see if I found it here so I get the state correct. But anyway, she was going. like 100 miles per hour. She has been pulled over several times, and she said that the Constitution of her state gave her the right to actually speed. And reading the article and reading the section of the law that she mentioned, amazingly, I agree with her that the Constitution, New Hampshire is out of New Hampshire. If you go and read the portion of the law that she mentioned, I’m not quite sure she’s wrong. Because it says basically, and I’m paraphrasing that if you’re going to the legislation or you’re coming back from there, that police cannot pull you over. Police can’t stop you if that’s your destination. And I’m like, in the plain letter of the law, she’s not wrong. Now, is she taking advantage and maybe going by the letter of the law rather than the spirit of the law? Maybe. But by the plain letter of the law, I can’t say she’s wrong. As bonkers as it may be, she might be right.

[Jay]

Is she, I was going to ask if she’s a sovereign citizen, but probably not if she’s invoking her state constitution. Probably not.

[MCG]

I’m just simply saying, you know, you can read the articles again on Fox News that she might not be wrong in what she’s saying. There you have it. Again, I’m no lawyer. So I guess my final charge or challenge, as usual, is do you agree with us? I’ll end with this article. I’ll read a portion of it. Non-religious NASA astronaut broke down in tears seen cross after Adamus II mission. So NASA astronaut and Adamus II commander Reed Wiseman said that although he’s not a religious man, he broke down in tears after returning from the mission and felt such intense emotion that he asked to speak to a Navy chaplain. During a press conference at Johnson Space Center in Houston, Texas, on Thursday, NASA astronauts who returned from the Atomos 2 mission last week discussed their experience in outer space. The astronauts were asked whether they had an experience similar to that of Apollo 14 astronaut Edgar Mitchell, who, after returning from the mission, focused on studying the nature of human consciousness. When Wiseman was asked whether he experienced a universal connectedness upon returning to Earth or a shift in consciousness, described emotional impact of the experience. I am not really a religious person, but there was just no other avenue for me to explain anything or to experience anything. So I asked for the chaplain on the Navy ship to just come visit us for a minute. And when that man walked in, I never met him before in my life, but I saw the cross on his collar and I broke down in tears. It is very hard to fully grasp what we just went through. He added, noting that the crew had been undergoing medical testing and hasn’t yet had the time to decompress we have not had the reflection time so I’m basing this on what we saw and when the sun eclipsed the moon I think all four of us I turned to Victor Glover and said I don’t think Humanity has evolved to the point of being able to comprehend what we looked at right now because it was other worldly and he went on how in awe they were at the fact what they saw and they have experienced something that a few humans in this world will ever experience And unfortunately, they’re turning to whatever the human consciousness and Navy chaplain. I don’t know if the Navy chaplain was even sound. But the Bible, of course, declared in Psalms 19, verse one, the heavens declare the glory of God and the firmament sure it is handiwork. I would say that they probably got to see God handiwork better than most men would ever see. And it drove them to the Creator. even though they don’t realize that. Psalms 8.4 says, When I consider the heavens, the work of thy fingers, the moon and stars which thou hast ordained, what is man that thou art mindful of him? and the son of men that thou visitest him. They realize how small they are. They realize, look, the Bible tell us in Romans 1:20, for the inverbal things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse. They are without excuse now. They have seen it. When God gave you first light, you respond to that light, you reveal more light. These people have seen something, the handiwork of God, The glory of God declared through the heavens and they adjourn to him. But when they adjourn to him, they return and they go to whoever that don’t have the gospel to share with them. And that’s where we come as a Christian. Yes, we went through some really crazy articles showing that this world is bonkers. And apparently this world have always been bonkers. But what are you doing about it? Do you agree with us? Well, if you agree with us, let me encourage you to share the gospel in your Jerusalem. That is what is going to make this world a little bit less bonkers. When one beggar tell another beggar where to find their bread, where one sinner tell another sinner where to find their savior, where one person who was on their way to hell show another person the way to be on their way to heaven. So the Bible says, of course, in Mark 16, 15, and he says to them, go into all the world and preach the gospel. And that’s the ultimate aim of these bunkers, is not just to harp upon the crazy things people are doing out there, but to show you, hey, this world need Christ and go and tell others.

[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; we attempted to remove barriers so that we all can have a clear view of the cross.