All Episodes
Previous Next
Plain Text
Oct. 25, 2022 - The Charlie Kirk Show
01:39:45
The Cult of Scientism LIVE from University of Missouri Kansas City
Transcriber: nvidia/parakeet-tdt-0.6b-v2, sat-12l-sm, and large-v3-turbo
|

Time Text
Trust Pax With Your Money 00:02:47
Hey, everybody.
Today, the Charlie Kirk Show, a campus stop that I did at the University of Missouri, Kansas City.
I think you'll really enjoy it.
Email me your thoughts as always: freedom at charliekirk.com.
That is freedom at charliekirk.com.
Get involved with TurningPointUSA Today at tpusa.com.
This entire speech is brought to you by Turning Point USA that we gave in Kansas City.
Great people, phenomenal operation that we have here.
Our Turning Point USA chapter did such a good job.
I take questions in the audience as well.
Let's give some remarks really about science is the main thrust of my speech.
Give me, email me your thoughts, freedom at charliekirk.com, and open up your podcast app and type in Charlie Kirk Show.
Love hearing from you and love when you subscribe.
As always, you can email me, freedom at charliekirk.com.
Buckle up, everybody.
Here we go.
Charlie, what you've done is incredible here.
Maybe Charlie Kirk is on the college campus.
I want you to know we are lucky to have Charlie Kirk.
Charlie Kirk's running the White House, folks.
I want to thank Charlie.
He's an incredible guy.
His spirit, his love of this country, he's done an amazing job building one of the most powerful youth organizations ever created, Turning Point USA.
We will not embrace the ideas that have destroyed countries, destroyed lives, and we are going to fight for freedom on campuses across the country.
That's why we are here.
Brought to you by Andrew and Todd at Sierra Pacific Mortgage.
For personalized loan services, you can count on.
Go to andrewandtodd.com, the wonderfulandrewandtodd.com.
The end of the year is right around the corner, and it's time for you to consider a change in your investment plan.
This is Charlie Kirk, and I strongly recommend you go right now and see my friends at PAX to review your investments.
They are the one firm I know that focuses on biblical, responsible investing and does not force you to invest in companies that literally attack Christian values.
If we want religious liberty in our country, we have to stop investing in companies that are trying to suppress our freedoms.
I love PAX Financial.
They manage some of my money.
I trust them.
And that's why before the end of the year, you need to text the word Charlie to the number 74868.
That's Charlie to 74868.
And someone with PAX Financial Group will connect you right away.
So take out your phone, text the word Charlie to 74868.
I trust them with my money, and I think you should trust them with your money.
That is the word Charlie to 74868.
They're a great operation.
Check them out today.
I want to talk tonight because there was a news story that caught my eye where actually, if you live in Kansas, I got to get this right.
If you live in Kansas, your senator had a very eloquent rebuke of this, Senator Marshall, which I really appreciated.
Misapplication of Science Today 00:14:40
He really had a forceful condemnation of what's happening in Boston.
I think there's some philosophical lessons here.
So if you saw the story, maybe you didn't.
In the last 24 hours, Boston University has come out and they've said they've developed a new COVID strain that can kill up to 80% of people.
And Senator Marshall kind of just said what we were all thinking: like, what the hell are we doing exactly?
Like, this is the dumbest thing ever.
And so, yeah, I think there's a lot to learn here.
Not just, first of all, I've asked the question: what exactly is the best case scenario of developing a COVID strain that could kill 80% of the people that it infects?
Like, what's the best case scenario that comes out of this?
And it could potentially leak.
It could go into the rest of society and cause a lot of damage.
But it does beg the question, first and foremost, who's funding it?
So there's a constitutional question here because actually the federal government's very involved in this through what we call the fourth branch of government and kind of what I believe to be the unconstitutional growth of the administrative states.
We'll talk about that, but also kind of this cult of scientism, which is very, very dangerous.
And it touches the abortion topic, it touches the trans topic, and also touches the COVID topic.
So, I'm going to go through those three.
So, first, I want to kind of talk a little bit about how we view science.
And so, a critique that a lot of conservatives get is that we're anti-science.
Of course, that's not true.
We just don't believe that science should be used to dominate nature and change nature.
It should be to explore nature, to understand it, to allow human beings to flourish.
We trust the science.
We just don't trust the scientists you continually put on television that are wrong about everything and repeatedly and have no concern for the moral well-being or future of our children, and quite honestly, concocted the worst mistake of my lifetime, which was locking down the healthy young to destroy their lives.
And it was the dumbest thing we've ever done as a society.
And so, it does beg that question: you know, how should we view science?
Because a lot of what we are kind of experiencing right now in society, I think, is the misapplication or the misapproach of what science should be.
So, first, you have to ask yourself, what is nature?
Now, there'll probably be a lot of different religious beliefs here tonight.
I'm a Christian, I'm proud of it.
I believe that nature is designed, it's not an accident.
I believe there's a harmony to nature.
I believe that nature is there not for us to serve nature, but to serve human beings.
You can have a disagreement with that.
But there's something deeper to map, to chart.
And the deeper we dive into nature, the more we realize, whether the human genome or whether we just understand kind of the basic configuration of our environment or planet, is that I believe it's just overwhelming this is not an accident, right?
That there is a designer, that nature is there for a very specific intent and purpose.
And we can have that out in the discussion question if we want.
But the purpose is that if you have that belief, or even something similar, you might be a deist, you might be something where you say, you know what, I think there's something special here, okay?
Well, then you enter kind of the natural world with some humility, saying that, okay, if there's a purpose and there's an intent, I want to explore this, and I don't want to necessarily exert my own will over nature.
It's a very important thing.
And so, when you're trying to explore nature and discover things so human beings can flourish, you can have all sorts of wonderful breakthroughs and scientific developments.
But if you come after science and say, or come after nature and you say, Oh, yeah, that's really cute, it's a you know, it's an accident or it's a mistake of history, I want to be able to exert our human will over it by any means necessary.
And one of the untold stories of the 20th century is the damage that scientism did to humanity across the world.
And this is an untold story of the National Socialist Workers' Party in Germany or in the Soviet Union: the amount of mad scientists that wreaked havoc over humanity of the tragedies that we talk about-the Holocaust, the Soviet Union-almost, if you go back and you reverse-engineer it, there was always at the end of that road, there was a group of experts that knew better than you did that said, in some way, shape, or form, we need to do this for experimental reasons or eugenic reasons.
And that should have been a big learning lesson.
We obviously didn't learn that lesson back in the 20th century.
Hopefully, you'll learn it now.
And so, you look at kind of the philosophical urge to now go create a new COVID strain, you got to wonder that the people that are pushing forward that in Boston University to have a COVID strain that could kill 80% of the people it comes in contact with, these are people that, and I, this sounds overly simple, but I'll justify it, which is they want to play God.
There is no other way to just only a deity can create a virus, and they feel as if as long as I can get close to that in a laboratory, I can have almost godlike dominion over nature.
And that's really sick and perverted and wrong.
And imagine the potential cataclysmic damage.
I'm not here to depress people if just that leaks, right?
If that leaks and it causes 80% of people, oh, sorry, we were just kind of doing experiments.
And if you look at actually COVID itself or the Chinese coronavirus or Fauci virus, whatever you know, term you want to use, it wasn't, it was science itself that developed this in the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
It was the misapplication and the wrong posture of gain of function research, which is intensifying an already pre-existing virus and making it even worse.
What drives a person to do that?
Well, it drives a person or a group or a government to do that if they do not have the posture towards nature of the natural world of one of study and appreciation, but instead of one of domination, altering and changing.
It's a very important difference that is very almost nuanced in the news cycle, but it dominates right now in how people look at abortion, also the trans issue.
I'll get to that in a second, but let me kind of finish the point of who's funding this.
So the NAIAD, I never get that right.
It's the National Association for, you know, of NAIAD, it's the National Institute of Funding Aid, and Fauci is the kind of the main driving force behind it.
Thank you.
Appreciate that.
And I never get it right.
I have to memorize all these government agencies, EPA, Employment Prevention Agency, the IRS, all these different ones, right?
And so thank you.
I appreciate that.
And so the kind of main takeaway of this is also, did Congress vote on it?
Now, if you go back to the founding fathers, they were very clear about separation of powers and consent to the governed and checks and balances.
Three branches, equal, you know, any fourth grader that's taught civics, of which they're increasingly not taught civics, could tell you exactly the moral premise behind separation of powers.
Starting in the 1920s, simultaneous, by the way, with kind of the regime of scientists and scientism, is there was this fourth branch of government where Woodrow Wilson, one of the worst presidents in American history, basically made an argument that the kind of founding fathers and what they said and what they did, that's old, that's outdated.
We got to turn our back on that.
A new era is here.
We have technology and we can govern men through different ideas and practices.
Now, the implications of that is that an entire new regime, if you will, of governmental power and control was ushered in that does not really fit into those checks and balances.
For example, the power is no longer in Congress or in the executive branch.
The power is in the deepest kind of chasms of the Department of Justice, the FBI, the Internal Revenue Service, the EPA.
And you have this unregulated regulatory agencies that are unchecked, largely unknown with unlimited power.
And it's very hard to then check and balance it.
And then you all of a sudden have very bad things happen.
And you ask yourself, who actually voted for this?
So, for example, Congress should say, if you're funding gain of function research at Boston University, not only should he lose your funding, like you should be arrested.
This is insane.
Like, why are we putting up with this?
I mean, let's, I mean, after this, maybe we could have put a pause on funding bioweapons, like a temporary pause.
And, but it happens when you have entire administrative organizations that exist without a proper check and balance, without that kind of ability to have power.
We'll talk a little about power properly allocated first from the sovereign, the people, then to the government.
This fourth branch of government is, I think, one of the great threats happening in America today that very few people understand.
And it's not even a political issue, by the way.
You know, some people say, oh, that's just conservatives saying that.
Regardless of what topic or issue you care about, there's no way you could make the argument that bureaucrats that are unaccountable to anyone but accept their own premise and go to the cadence of their own drum is somehow parallel with representative government or a free society.
You then have an entire super government that is basically created that becomes the sovereign.
It almost becomes inverse totalitarianism.
And then they start to do very dangerous things like spy on a sitting president and then get away with it.
I don't know if you saw the Igor Danchenko ruling today, just gets away with it, whatever they want.
Or a Department of Justice that raids a home of a former president because they say that he has paperwork not missing or paperwork missing or whatever the excuse was that they end up giving.
And so you see that idea of the administrative state in the fourth branch of government, you call it the deep state, you call it the shadow government, you're going to see more and more outrageous behavior like funding killer viruses and laboratories in Boston, of which the federal government is directly funding this.
And kind of the mascot of the administrative state, the person that best embodies it is Anthony Fauci.
And Anthony Fauci was never elected.
Okay, so no one ever went to a ballot box and said, you know, I want to give him a bunch of power.
He was largely unknown up until the virus, and he had unlimited amounts of power.
I make the argument that Anthony Fauci, and it's a great learning lesson, has anyone ever had as much power as Anthony Fauci had for 18 months in American history?
And okay, well, then you could ask me who maybe, maybe not, that's fine.
Maybe you're agreeing with me or not.
I don't know.
But the power to lock down your kids from going to school, the power to literally control the breathing of an entire generation, the power to kick people out of the military for not out of the military, for not taking mRNA gene-altering technology.
Like, that's an incredible amount of power.
And even if a president's had that kind of power, let's say Abraham Lincoln had that power, at least he was voted into office.
At least someone said, I want you to be in a position of authority.
And in some ways, Anthony Fauci became the sovereign, and Anthony Fauci became a lot more powerful and important than the American people.
So then you say, how on earth do we restrain that?
Well, this is why we need a complete and total constitutional reset in our country right now.
Whereas whatever the new Congress is, whoever takes power, there needs to be a mass check and balance campaign.
And I think a purge of this administrative state and the fourth branch of government.
And this is something I really want to, you know, kind of, you know, whether you live in Missouri or Kansas, both Missouri and Kansas, I think, have been abused by the federal government for far too long.
You have allowed the federal government to misrepresent you for so long.
There is so much power in the states.
And never before, probably since the American Civil War, it hasn't been this bad, where the people are so misrepresented by their government, there's such a misalignment.
The needs, wants, and concerns to an average person in Missouri or Kansas is so out of what someone in Washington, D.C. cares about.
Just look at what they spend their time talking about all day long.
Like January 6th hearings.
That's the only, that's what their top focus is.
And I mean, you could have opinions on that.
You could think it's important.
But I would imagine in this room, immigration, crime, inflation, economy, and the well-being of the country, not having kids learn pornography in schools is probably more important than the January 6th Committee.
Probably.
So, but when the administrative state calls the shots, what it does is it weakens your own power.
And so let's kind of talk about it.
If you form a government, the founding fathers created the longest-lasting constitutional republic in world history because they understood human nature.
Human nature does not change.
It stays the same.
Regardless, if you have more technology, nature of human beings does not change.
It's very important, goes back to the scientism argument.
So in the 1920s, a bunch of scientists got super excited, especially German historicists and German scientists, where they thought a new era was coming.
We have faster cars, we have airplanes, we have machine guns.
We don't have to know, we no longer have to be tied to the teachings of the past.
A new type of human being can be ushered in.
This is so unbelievably dangerous, and a lot of kids are learning this in college and high school.
Oh, we have Twitter.
We're different than the people 2,000 years ago.
Or, oh, we have vaccines.
We're a lot better.
In fact, technology, in my opinion, only makes it easier for the evil that we have to struggle against every single day to be implemented into action.
In fact, I think technology actually makes it easier for us to do the worst possible things imaginable.
Just go look at the 20th century.
The 20th century, I mean, just look at the last 50 years in our country as well, is that technology misapplied with the wrong moral compass makes it easier to go kill 100 million people in mainland China.
Makes it easier to go kill 50 million people in the Soviet Union or the National Socialist Workers' Party.
And so then it gets back to this question of what is a human being, right?
So I believe a human being is designed and created.
Our founding fathers believed that as well, by the way, they said it very, very clearly and beautifully: laws of nature and nature is God, endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights.
Now, some people say the founding fathers were deists.
That's a bunch of nonsense.
There was a couple people with that opinion, but 55 out of 56 of the signers of the Declaration of Independence were Bible-believing church attending Christians.
Now, that's a fact.
And so now they were very clear in the Declaration.
God is mentioned four times, but you could have, there's a lot of, there's a lot of, let's just say, flexing those joints for your own theological and religious opinions.
But it's inarguable that they believe the human being was designed and created.
Okay?
That's what they believed.
Now, with that being said, though, I believe a human being is not just a mind.
It's not just reason.
It's not just feelings.
It's also a soul.
That's a big deal.
To believe a human being has a soul all of a sudden has a completely completely different approach to what you're able to do to another human being.
Now, if you do not believe a human being has a soul, then I'm willing to hear any humanist argument on morality tonight, but basically over a period of time, regardless of how good of a humanist, secularist you personally might be, eventually a lot of people are going to die if you have more, if you have less power than the people that have a lot of power.
That's what history tells us: is that if you do not believe that human beings are created for a purpose, I believe made in the image of their creator, then why would you not use your power to exterminate people that are weaker than you and exercise that power over them?
The Soul Defines Humanity 00:11:14
And then comes in kind of the abortion debate.
Now, you might have all sorts of different opinions on abortion.
I'm very pro-life.
I'm 100% pro-life.
I'm proud of it.
Happy to talk about it.
But regardless of your opinion on abortion, regardless of that, and all opinions are welcome.
I'm not here to scold you or shame you.
I can't stand when people do that, right?
I'm not here to call you bad names or whatever.
We've got to have a conversation about it.
And maybe I'll make you think differently and you can make me think differently about it.
Okay.
The point is this, though, that it's inarguable that abortion within the abortion philosophy is a belief that I can use medical technology to exterminate another being to make my life easier.
That is the philosophical underpinning.
You might say, I still believe that's okay.
That's fine.
But it is the fact that I'm larger, I'm more developed, I'm not in a womb, and I'm not as dependent.
Therefore, I should be able to use scientific medical technology to be able to exterminate or terminate or discontinue a life that is not as developed, not as large, and is not in a womb like I am.
Okay.
So if you say that's the case, then how is it any different than if you extrapolate that kind of moral premise than saying that people that are not able to defend themselves in other circumstances should not then be protected outside of the womb?
And we see that playing out in every single capacity.
Now, you might say, well, Charlie, it's different if it's in the womb and outside the womb.
And I say, really, where are you going to put the moral, first of all, it's all human life.
Let's just be very clear.
Okay.
The second thing is, where are you going to then put the moral guardrails where you say we've had a million abortions a year, every single year for the last 50 or 60 years?
That's an extraordinary number, 3,000 a day.
Okay?
Now, you could start to see that extrapolated in other ways, which you see Planned Parenthood that's just recently come out.
They're diversifying their business model, right?
Planned Parenthood is coming out, and they want to now get into gender reassignment surgeries for minors.
Now, it's actually perfectly consistent, though.
The same organization that believes it's okay to crush a young person in the womb believes it's okay to alter the nature of their being and their essence if they're 12 years old.
It's all a question of the will.
It's all a question of I am more powerful than you, so I should be able to use the technology at our disposal to exert that will.
We as conservatives should say, no, just because you are able to do it does not mean you should do it.
And that's a big deal.
And so that kind of gets into that other argument where people want to play God or whatever.
And I just, I laughed.
Someone said the other day, you know, Charlie, you know, 12-year-olds and 13-year-olds should be able to medically mutilate themselves or whatever.
You know, we had this discussion back there and we are at UT Austin, so go figure, right?
It was quite the lively conversation.
And I just, I think it's such an interesting moment for our country of, are we going to stand up for our kids?
You have a 13-year-old that has a high likelihood of making a regrettable, irreversible decision.
And we want to even open up the opportunity to go put them into a surgical operation of which it's irreversible that could damage them for the rest of their life.
At the very least, the consensus should be, okay, wait till you're an adult.
But that's not what's happening.
The opposite is happening is that, in fact, Vanderbilt University, the Boston Children's Hospital, Seattle Children's Hospital, they're coming out and they're saying that a massive amount of money and revenue is coming into these hospitals in these medical mutilation, gender reassignment surgeries.
And, you know, then I got, here's really where the essence of it is.
And this is where education has gone wrong and parents will like what I have to say and some of the kids are going to disagree with it.
So it's fine.
Don't worry.
We'll do the opposite later.
I'll do something where the parents will disagree and the kids will like what I say, which is this.
There is this, if you kind of study romantic literature, romanticism, John Jacques Rousseau, and all this, they believe that children are born innocent.
And as they get older, they get more and more corrupted by the capitalist, colonialistic, misogynistic culture, okay?
Kind of, if you think back to the television show, kids say the darndest things, you remember that?
That shows a bunch of rubbish, right?
And it's nonsense because it's elevating like childhood wisdom as if they have something to tell us and the adults don't.
Now, kids might mistakenly say something like super wise and amazing, but do you actually, if you actually read the anti-racist literature of the left and critical theory, they say children see the world through a pure lens and we can learn so much of how they view things, you know, without their not being blurred by all the racism and the misogyny and the homophobia.
And you think about it, that's exactly why they think the 12-year-old knows what's better for their gender medical mutilation surgery than an adult who's actually lived life and thinks that that person might be making an irreversible mistake.
It's the exact same thing.
Education, I always laugh, and I might offend somebody in here.
Fine.
Fourth graders and third graders, they say, yeah, I get all my kids around the room and I ask them about current events and what they think about it.
That's an awful idea.
Your third graders don't know anything.
You should be telling them what do true, beautiful, good, and wise things say about current events.
Now, they might mistakenly stumble upon something.
It's completely irrelevant what a third grader has to say.
And I always laugh.
There's a huge paradox, right?
Where they say, you know what?
We want you to have to be 21 years old to go buy an assault rifle, made up term, right?
But if you're 12 years old, you should be able to remove your breasts without parental consent and have a taxpayer funded.
Which one is it exactly?
Is it that you can't be able to own deadly weaponry?
Or should I be able to go into an operating room and make changes that are totally like horrific?
I can't even get into the words of this.
You might say, oh, Charlie, it's a fridge minority.
No, it's not.
This is growing in our literature, in our textbooks, in our propaganda.
And it's going down to such a level where six, seven, and eight-year-olds are now seeing these TikTok videos.
They're seeing this nonsensical garbage being thrown at them.
They say, well, maybe I'm a girl.
Maybe I'm a boy.
Now, if you look at the actual numbers, though, the vast majority of people that are coming out as trans are 12, 13, and 14-year-old girls.
What they're really probably experiencing is puberty anxiety, and they don't have proper mentors or guardianship or guiding parental saying, your body's changing.
I love you.
Let me guide you through this.
Instead, it's my body's changing.
Maybe I'm actually a man and I need to go on loop run.
And then you have an entire, in my opinion, predatory industry of some psychiatrist or some great in every position, but there's some awful psychiatrist where they say, well, I do gender-affirming care.
And I say, is that really the point of counseling to affirm somebody?
I thought the point is to get them better, not to confirm what's wrong with them.
For example, we don't allow anorexics to continue to be anorexic if it's going to make them die of starvation.
You don't allow someone's mental condition.
You don't play into it.
You challenge them towards what is true or good.
Or we do not allow agoraphobia, or hopefully not agoraphobics, people afraid to leave their home.
We try to challenge them.
And this is kind of the cognitive behavioral therapy approach, CBT, which is, you know what?
You're afraid of this.
Let's find out why.
And we're going to try to get you into a better place.
Instead, it's, you're afraid of it.
I'm going to make it so you never have to leave the home.
And so they have an entire industry built around that.
And then you have, of course, if you dare speak out against it, they call you all the worst names.
I don't care, and you shouldn't either.
This is the fight for our children.
And I know it's tempting because some people say, well, Charlie, these are very personal decisions.
In some cases, that's true.
But I think it's actually not that much anymore.
Of course, it's individually personal decisions.
But it's really more than any other time, a mass societal silence on this issue of if we're kind of endorsing what I believe to be the great mutilation of a generation where we're going to have hundreds of thousands of kids.
You look at some of these videos, and it will make you cry.
These young 19-year-old girls that had their breasts removed when they were 14 or 15 or 16, they say, so when are they going to grow back?
They say, and by the way, puberty is not like something you could press a button and then restart again.
And so that all goes back to what I said earlier.
What is science?
If you believe the human being is something that was beautifully designed for a purpose, you would be very careful going after a 14-year-old human being under an operating table to do something as horrific and barbaric as this.
It all comes back to what is a human being and what is science.
And so it's very tempting to want to talk about politics.
You guys could talk about it.
I'm actually not here to talk about it.
Again, I can answer any questions you have.
You know, nothing's off limit because politics is just a result of whether or not we win or lose the moral arguments before that.
And so when we allow this all to happen around us, we're always kind of workshopping somebody else's morality that is then implied here.
But let me tell you, in Kansas and Missouri, I just want to encourage you, if there's any place in America that should be an example of bold and courageous leadership when it comes to this stuff, I know the people in Kansas and Missouri are not going to put up with this stuff.
I hope your leaders agree with you.
And it goes from the textbooks to the curriculum to all the propaganda.
Okay.
And so to kind of put all this in closing together, I understand that it could be overwhelming if you dare speak about it.
I was talking to some medical students before.
They say, Charlie, it's worse than ever.
I can't speak out about any of this stuff.
I totally understand it.
I'm not here to try to have you be martyred or lose your job for whatever reason or purpose.
But I do want to consider that you will be happier and freer if you could be the same person in public that you are in private.
That's my heart for you, that you can be the same person in every circumstance.
Because that's the number one piece of feedback I receive from people is they say, Charlie, I wish I could be the same person at work that I am in private.
And that's not a free country.
And what's so amazing is that it actually transcends politics, isn't it?
Because there's not necessarily a law that says you can't be who you want to be in front of your friends.
No, that's cultural pressure.
That's bigger than politics, right?
And that's part of what we're trying to solve here now.
It's what turning point USA solves.
It's giving kids the intellectual ammunition, the confidence, the courage, the ability to respond to someone that says, actually, you know, I am a conservative.
And let me tell you why.
I believe that if we don't study history and understand human nature, really bad things can happen.
I believe America is the greatest nation ever to exist in the history of the world.
I believe the Constitution is the greatest political document ever written.
We know the states created the federal government and the federal government didn't create the states.
And I believe the people of Kansas know what they're doing a lot better than the people of Washington, D.C.
And I want to change that.
And we should be unafraid to say that.
Or Missouri, just to be fair.
I get it all confused.
You fly into Missouri and it's actually, it's in Kansas.
No, you fly into Kansas, but it's called Kansas, but you drive.
It's all very confusing.
But I have to, it's back and forth in this whole thing.
The airport's in Kansas, right?
No, it's not.
It's in Missouri.
See, this is how messed up I am.
We're in Kansas City, Missouri, for everyone watching on the live stream.
Okay.
And there's actually an interesting point about all that, though, which is what if everyone had their own definition of directions of what state you're in?
That's the trans thing.
It is.
If everyone had their own, the way you corrected me put me into alignment directionally and put me into alignment factually, that's society with proper guardrails.
What if everyone had their own truth of directions?
Nope, I'm actually in Kansas.
No, you're not in Missouri.
No, it's my truth.
I'm in, I'm there.
There's a lot of truth.
There's a lot of truth to that.
Truth Beyond Geographic Lines 00:05:19
We teach a generation.
You can believe you're in Kansas even though in your Missouri.
That's the trans issue summarized.
All right, let's do some questions.
God bless you guys.
Let's line up for some questions.
Rents are soaring at unprecedented highs.
If you're renting or have a friend or family member, that is, now is a great time to make the move to homeownership.
Look, you got to own.
Renting, that's great.
Reset stuff.
Andrew Del Rey and Todd of Akien at Sierra Pacific Mortgage have helped so many people make that leap from renting to owning with lots of programs that offer first-time buyers assistance with little to no down payment needed.
I encourage you right now to visit my buddies, their website.
They're great guys.
They're Christians.
They're conservatives.
They love the Lord.
AndrewNTodd.com right now.
The thing I love about these guys is it's not about the transaction.
They're helping you create a plan to help you reach your goals.
Give them a call or go to their website, andrewandTodd.com.
With today's still historically low interest rates, it's easier than you think to become a homeowner.
I've relied on them and producer Andrew has as well.
I highly recommend you take action now.
And if you knew someone paying rent, tell them about Andrew and Todd.
Go to andrewandodd.com and tell them the Charlie Kirk Show sent you.
All right, so first off, I just personally want to thank you very much for being here.
It's an amazing opportunity for me, and I would assume for a lot of people here as well.
I would like to, secondly, congratulate you on your whole fatherhood.
You know, the newborn, that's, yeah, that's true.
Thank you.
And so, going off of that, I would just like to know, you know, you being a husband, a father, and a big political figure, it's like, how do you cope with like making all those things important in your life?
Yeah, well, thank you.
It's not a lot of sleep, but it's a lot of fun.
Two months today.
That's just amazing.
So we're very happy about that.
And so thank you.
And I'll tell you what, it radicalizes you.
It does.
If you think you're a conservative before parenthood, holy moly.
That's why I can't understand.
I cannot understand liberal parents.
At this point, I have nothing in common with you.
Liberal young people that are single, you want to burn the world down, you're miserable and do weed all day fine.
So I sort of understand.
You have a being that you are now responsible for, and you want to commit civilizational arson, nothing in common with you.
So anyway, that's a separate thing.
So you mentioned a lot, which is I'm a big fan of Aristotle.
Aristotle talked about a hierarchy of the good.
When you have a lot going on, this is a good rule for young people.
You got to make a hierarchy of what matters most, and you got to prioritize that thing over other things, which means by definition, other things are going to slip aside.
And then, kind of part of marriage and also fatherhood, of which I'm very new at, but learning very quickly, but you know, marriage a year and a half, you realize it's not all about you.
And this is one of the great, I just, I hate the self-love movement.
I hate the self-esteem movement.
It's done so much damage.
I think it's one of the great philosophical carcinogens in our society in so many different ways.
I saw this sign the other day.
They said, it's your imperfections that make you perfect.
And I thought to myself, I said, well, then therefore, by definition, the more imperfections you have, the better you are.
Or my favorite one is: the world is better because you're in it.
Now, that might sound like a good message, but in reality, it should be a question.
Is the world better because you're in it?
Right?
And so it should be a question.
Has the world become a better place because of you?
Now, so the idea of a hierarchy of what matters most is not taught a lot to our kids.
There's a big lie out there that you could have it all.
And that's not true.
You can't.
You have to make sacrifices.
You could still do a lot.
You could still run a business and you could still do things.
But you have to make time for what matters most, which the first most important thing is your relationship with God.
That comes above all.
And then relationship with your wife and then your child.
You notice I put it in that order.
That's biblical, by the way.
And getting a lot of great advice from people like Prager and Tucker and so many other great people that the marriage comes first and then children come first, which is not agreed upon in every circle, but at least that's how we're practicing it.
And then you could have other things like jobs and all that, you know, jobs and that.
But I think one of the reasons why we have such a depressed generation, suicidal generation, we have such an anxious generation, a medicated generation, is they're thinking about themselves all the time.
I believe a people that is not dedicated to service is a very depressed people.
It's not always about you.
Sometimes you have to do stuff you don't like because it's going to benefit somebody else.
By the way, we just know that scientifically you're a happier person because of that.
We know that, regardless of the spiritual implications or the moral implications.
And so we have an entire generation that's always asking, how do you feel?
How do you feel about that?
It's actually quite irrelevant.
It matters more about what you're doing.
And here's a thought-provoking thing for you.
Generally, what you do should dictate how you feel, not how you feel with what you do.
That's a good general rule to tell a young person.
Another good rule for life, which is self-control is a lot more important than self-esteem.
But we do the opposite.
Thank you.
Action Over Feelings Always 00:04:57
Go ahead.
Welcome to Kansas City.
I just want to.
Thank you.
I'm a big fan, and we're glad you're here.
My question is: have you tried our barbecue?
I did, and it's awesome.
Very impressed.
Lived up to the hype, I got to tell you.
For years, I heard Texas versus Kansas City, Texas versus Kansas City.
It's very, very good.
I'm not going to tell you who's better, but it's very, very good.
That was going to be my follow-up question.
Oh, yeah, is that right?
I take the fifth.
Thank you.
Hello.
Look what you did here.
No, I'm kidding.
Sorry about that.
No, it's 100% my fault.
I don't know what that was.
My bad.
All right.
Here's my question.
So you think there are two genders.
Okay.
But the definition of gender, although it's incredibly hard to define, is basically how I feel towards my biological sex.
But in theory, I can feel an infinite amount of ways about my biological sex.
So in theory, there are like an infinite amount of genders.
But you say there's only two.
So, A, I don't think that makes a whole lot of sense.
Secondly, you also, every time you use the word gender, you could replace it with the word sex every single time.
Also, you say we shouldn't concede linguistic ground to the left, but you use the word gender constantly in discourse.
To me, it seems like you just don't think gender exists, or at the very least, has no epistemic credibility in public discourse.
So, why do you concede that linguistic ground if you basically don't think it exists logically?
Okay, yeah, I think gender and sex are interchangeable words.
They're exactly the same thing.
So, I mean, do you agree with that?
Oh, yeah, I totally agree with that.
Oh, okay, cool.
So, you believe there's two genders, two sexes.
So, yeah, you probably make a good point.
I see what you're saying here: is that why even use the word gender at all?
Yeah, I mean, colloquially, it's used a lot in society.
I also think it's a way to kind of draw the line against the transgender movement because they've intentionally kind of gone on to that social word gender, of which is a new age postmodern term that really did not exist prior to the 1970s, 1980s.
So, I think you actually make a pretty good point about seeding ground, but the intent is that I believe gender and sex are directly related.
Thank you.
Appreciate it.
Hey, so I am a sophomore here in credits, but first year, like actually on campus.
And so, being a first-year student, I'm required to take this first semester experience class.
And so, right, thanks.
Yeah, so right now, our unit is about social justice.
And I've got this assignment due on later this week.
And so, one of the questions is, what does social justice mean to you?
And what are important components of social justice?
So, how do I go about completing this assignment while still maintaining my conservative and Christian values?
What kind of grade do you want to get in the class?
I'm very serious.
I would, you know, college education is a very important part of me, but I wouldn't let that supersede my political or religious values.
So, you developed a hierarchy.
That's what you just did, right?
So, you just said this matters more than that.
And so, if you want to go after it, you could say, look, I believe in the ancient view of justice that built the West.
I don't believe in environmental justice or racial justice or social justice.
And you could go straight into how Aristotle defined justice.
It is the messiest of all the virtues, but one of the most necessary.
And it's very simple: giving man to what is due.
Social justice is not that.
Social justice is mass redistribution based on qualities of things people can't change.
So justice has a preference on human agency and action.
You did this, you get that.
Social justice is you look like this, therefore this should happen to you.
So social justice, and I'm generalizing and people can disagree with it throughout, but this is approximately right.
Social justice is a preference on structures and I think arbitrary iniquities.
Saying you're a person of color, therefore you deserve reparations.
Of course, they can't answer a single question in response to, okay, what if someone is half black and half white?
How are they going to get reparations exactly?
Or why is it that someone who's never owned slaves, that didn't know someone that owns slaves, that wasn't related to someone that owns slaves, has to pay money to somebody who we can't even prove whether or not they're a descendant of slaves?
Why is that the case exactly?
Oh, because of the melanin content.
That's where social justice leads you.
So then I would respond again, depending on what kind of grade you want to get, is say, liberty matters a lot more to me than social justice.
And then you might have to retake the course at a different time.
Will Of The People Matters 00:07:56
So God bless you.
Hello.
So from your talk, I gathered that a big problem you have is the government representing the will of the people, and you believe it should do a better job at that, correct?
If you say that, how can you support Donald Trump when he has lost the popular vote twice?
Because we don't elect presidents using the popular vote.
It'll follow.
Yes, but you said you have an issue with the government not representing the will of the people.
So if you personally have an issue with that, then why do you support him if that is not the will of the people?
Right.
So will and majority are two different things.
Right?
So are we a democracy?
You're not here.
Are we a democracy?
Should we be?
No, but are we?
Why should we not be?
Is that not a core fundamental point of American society?
No.
Has democracy appeared anywhere in the Constitution?
I mean, that is genuinely a valid point.
However, your point of the government should represent the people, why is it that democracy is not in the Constitution?
Or why is it that you believe that the will of the majority is not as important as the will of the minority if your issue specifically is the government should represent the people better?
Good question.
So we believe in the Electoral College.
Why?
Because Kansas deserves a voice.
Because Missouri deserves a voice.
And it's the most important way I could distill it: the union we have is the states created it.
The federal government didn't create it.
So the kind of price of admission is every state gets two senators, congressmen based on population, and then electoral votes based on that population.
So you kind of get a mix of both.
And it's also this tension.
And I would ask the question: if we abolished the Electoral College, do you think that the needs, wants, and interests of Missouri, Kansas, Iowa, North, South Dakota, Montana would be taken as seriously as New York and California?
That would be my question to you.
Do you believe that some citizens are more valuable than others?
Because in our current system, some people's votes hold more sway than others, because people in like Wyoming, who have smaller populations, have more say than places like here in Missouri and Kansas.
Why is this acceptable if it's, again, your issue is the will of the people?
Because we're not a democracy.
So a democracy is simple majoritarianism.
So let me give you an example.
In a democracy, by up or down vote, you could say, I want to enslave black people.
A constitutional republic says, no, you're going to have to go through a process to do that.
So let me ask you a question.
Do you think the majority at the will of the people could ever be wrong?
Yes.
Okay.
So the founding fathers knew it could almost assuredly be wrong, right?
So the system of a republic versus a democracy has to be slow and arduous and intentional because it has a preference on liberty, right, not on free stuff.
And so over a period of time, how do you best protect liberty?
Well, you got to spread over all the representation over space and time, right?
So you do it over a lot of states, a lot of square miles, a lot of acreage, and it takes a lot of time to take over the federal government, right?
You have to win an election and then an election and election.
It's not impossible.
We eradicated slavery.
We gave women the right to vote.
So it's possible to get change done.
But the founding fathers were less concerned about getting progress done really quickly, and they were more concerned with the government doing bad stuff too quickly.
Does that make sense?
But that is not what you said.
You said that your specific problem is the government does not do the will of the people.
Why is it that your will and what you want is more important than that of the majority?
Well, it's not my will.
It's the framers and the system we have.
But to answer your question, I believe the best way to determine the will of the people is through states' rights and states' directives.
If Kansas wants to say, hey, we can have decentralized gun laws or school choice, God bless Kansas.
And so the question is not, it's national will also versus state will, right?
So, we have to recognize that the values of someone in Kansas, in Manhattan, Kansas, is a lot different than the values of someone in Manhattan, New York.
It's a lot different.
And so, through a democracy, it'd say, hey, the people of New York City want to have firearms confiscated.
I don't know how, I don't think that dog's going to hunt in Manhattan, Kansas.
Well, Kansas State University, so I don't know.
But it allows, answer your question, it allows people that disagree with one another to live in the same nation.
You see, a Republican-style government, small R, allows people that might agree on almost nothing to still engage in self-government while still having a national project to participate in.
So, to clarify it even more, it is a question of the consent to the governed.
If it was just a democracy, it would be an up or down vote on every single person, and that's it.
The founding fathers saw that fail time and time again.
Athenian democracy.
People just vote themselves stuff.
So, they said, we have to have some sort of system that realizes that if men were angels, government would not be necessary, but men are not angels, so we got to create some sort of government.
Federalist 51, as Madison said.
So, we got to figure this out.
So, government is necessary, but we don't want to have too big a government, and people are just going to vote themselves stuff all the time.
So, how do we do that?
Well, local is better than national, but you got to have some sort of a national influence.
And so, they created the great balance between Jeffersonian and Hamiltonian-type philosophy, as we know, is the U.S. Constitution.
And the one thing they all agreed on, though, is human nature.
They knew that absolute power corrupts absolutely and that people were likely to abuse it.
So, I would just kind of counter by saying the will of the people can be best expressed through a multi-state project.
For example, I believe an election is much healthier and much more representative by requiring candidates to go to Iowa, Ohio, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and not just spending time on the coast.
Because you know why?
It might seem as if, oh, we don't need those flyover states.
We don't need them.
First of all, that's arrogant, prideful, and wrong.
How exactly are you going to feed your family, and where do you think the breadbasket of the world comes from?
The founders saw ahead.
And the final thing I'll say is this: it was Hamilton or it was Madison that said, we cannot have the tyranny of the cities over the farmers.
And that's built into our system.
Thank you for being here tonight.
I got to get to the next question.
Thank you.
So, you believe your vote should be more important than others?
No, I don't.
In fact, if you want, first of all, the way you do senators is egalitarian.
The way you do congresspeople is representative population.
And let me just reinforce this: which, again, California still has more electoral votes than Kansas.
So there is a precedent.
There is a weight on population.
It's just done in the context of that every state gets a voice.
For example, Kansas, South Dakota, Oklahoma don't get merged in just because they all look the same from an airplane you're flying by.
It's a state with states' rights, its own government, its own constitution.
So to push back, it's not as if population means nothing, is that population is factored in to a national project.
And I'll just say one final thing on states.
You go through COVID, Europe, they had one decree.
Every part of Germany, Belgium, France, the same thing.
These laboratories of democracy that continually happened keep us freer.
And you have a state rights project or you have a national project.
The state's rights project has kept us freer, has helped people more prosperous.
Because if you don't like your government, you're closer to it and you can make changes and adjustments.
Thank you.
States Rights And Decrees 00:16:20
Got to get to the next question.
Thank you.
Got to get to the, I'm sorry.
I got to get to the.
Thank you.
Thank you.
I got to get to the next question.
Why are some votes in order to make them?
I heard you out.
Thank you very much.
That's not the question.
More votes.
So, hey, do you live in Kansas or Missouri?
It doesn't matter why you're not.
Because guess what?
In Kansas, you actually have a bigger voice than some people in California.
Hilariously.
Because states have rights.
I got to get to the next question, but I don't think you're hearing what I'm saying.
Thank you very much.
You cannot judge it by your mentality.
Thank you very much.
Got to get to the next question.
What is your opinion on the suicidality rates of trans youth?
And what is your opinion on the drop that occurs in trans suicidality when they're accepted by their families?
Yeah, it goes up after about five or seven years.
Look, trans people are suffering from serious mental condition, gender dysphoria.
Let them talk.
What's not true?
The mental condition part?
It is different, but it's not.
What is gender dysphoria?
It's like the concern that you feel over the dysphoria.
It's like a body dysphoria related to the disconnect you feel between your mental state and how you feel about your body.
Right.
So it's a mental issue, right?
Yes.
Okay, so, right.
So people that are suffering from gender dysphoria have a mental condition, and I hope they get help.
Yeah, but this is, that's kind of like the same logic with conversion therapy, right?
Well, what about it?
Because you think there's something fundamentally wrong.
Well, I do think there's something fundamentally wrong with a 14-year-old girl who thinks they're a boy, yes.
That's...
Okay, why?
Well, because their chromosomes aren't in alignment with the fantasy in their head.
But why?
Why is that a problem?
Well, because your imagination doesn't determine your reality.
But no, no, no.
But how does wearing a dress instead of a suit to prom hurting anyone?
Okay, that's a separate question.
No, that's what gender is, though.
Oh, hold on a second.
Which question do you want me to keep the mic there so we can gender and sex are two different things?
We can.
Wrong.
Actually, actually, they're correlated.
They're correlated.
And there is, there is a, it's bimodal.
So let me ask you a question.
No, Can someone pick their minds?
I want you to answer my question.
Well, which one?
How does someone wearing a dress affect someone at prom?
If you let me finish.
Which one?
I can pick four questions.
All right.
It's more helpful for you, isn't it, right?
To think of gender and sex separately.
Socially.
Like if you're just talking and you refer to sex as one thing and gender as another, it's more helpful because there's nothing, there's no connection between, no direct connection between a dress and chromosomes, right?
So if you were to talk to someone about gender, why is it hurt some?
Why is it bad to wear a dress when, like, if I was to wear a dress to prom with my boyfriend, then why would that be a bad thing?
Got it.
Okay.
Because I have a Y chromosome.
Okay.
So why is it a bad thing?
Okay, I'll go through the list.
Well, number one, I don't think I should entertain something that is not true.
And that's a bad precedent for all of humanity.
And if you all of a sudden want to appropriate womanhood, you can't let me.
Let me finish.
Hold on.
I'm sorry.
You can't prove gender.
You can't prove the existence of gender.
Let me just talk about that.
You can't prove the existence of gender.
Let me say this.
You can't empirically measure.
You are using.
Thank you.
You're using a definition of gender and sex that is rather a new phenomenon.
Gender and sex are directly related.
So let me ask you a question.
Do you believe you could pick your pronouns?
Yes.
Do you believe you could pick your adjectives?
Yes.
You could choose different adjectives.
So I could be small.
I could be strong.
I could be rich.
I could be smart just by my own imagination?
It's a matter of social utility.
Okay, so what do you think determines reality?
You can empirically measure someone's chromosomes, but you can't empirically measure how much of a man or a woman someone is.
So, what makes something more manly versus more feminine?
There's no testosterone, estrogen, muscle mass size, proclivity towards emotional distress.
But you can change those.
I'm sorry?
You can change levels of testosterone and estrogen or androgen levels.
Yeah, you could suppress artificially and put things in.
You could also remove critical body parts.
There's a lot of things you could do that are not right.
Okay.
So that's more of an.
I'm a moral anti-realist.
So the point of that is that you can't, like, as long as it's someone's choice.
If you're, I think you need to wait until you're 18 probably to do a lot of gender-affirming surgeries.
But things like puberty blockers are actually really helpful because they can be reversed later on in life.
Yes, they can.
So you realize that's a chemical castration of children, right?
You can avoid that.
That doesn't happen.
They're safe.
They've been used since the 70s to help people through.
We're having stressful periods.
That's not true.
That is true.
You can't press pause on puberty.
The amount of drug.
That is the purpose of the drug.
Yeah, so then why would there be 30,000 people that regret transitioning and want to detransition that we know of?
And that list growing in great numbers.
And how do you explain suicide rates going up seven to eight years after the boost of testosterone when young people they get Lupron, they get puberty blockers, then seven, eight years later, the suicide rates go up dramatically?
How do you explain that?
I know what you're referring to.
That has to do with people being forced to detransition and the social pressure that occurs as a result of it.
The problem with transcripture, there's never been more transgender propaganda in the history of the species.
You can't walk into a Starbucks without seeing, you see the trans flag more than the American flag.
What social pressure is there on a trans person?
It's really different where I grew up.
I didn't grow up in a city.
It's rough sometimes.
Okay.
Well, if by rough you mean people love the truth enough, truth enough to tell a 15-year-old you're not actually a man or not actually a woman, I would not consider that rough, but I mean, you can have your own definition.
But let me just close by saying this, which is, what do you think determines reality?
Well, okay, well, okay, so your friends have been attacked?
Because of their identities.
Yeah, same.
Yeah.
So, okay.
Do I create a mass movement trying to tell people to feel sorry for me all the time?
Yeah, because, I mean, sure, if you want a few people to be sorry for you, I don't want your friends to get hurt.
Nor do I want your friends to get hurt.
But your rhetoric encourages that.
No, hold on.
Yes, it does.
Hold on.
The best way.
Okay.
All right.
Okay.
The best way to help people.
Let me just, I think, maybe we've got to find some agreement here.
A general rule for life.
Do you think the best way to help people, if you know, hold on, put the mic up in a second.
It's the best way to help people to lie to them or tell them the truth.
You need to tell them the truth.
I agree.
We should tell young boys that are suffering from gender dysphoria or young girls that are suffering from gender dysphoria that you're not going into an operating room and we love you enough to tell you the truth to get you back into alignment on how God created you.
Thank you for being here tonight.
Thank you.
Nope, next question.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Why don't he stop?
Thanks for being here.
The tolerant left strikes again.
How are you doing, sir?
Good.
So, Nori, I want you to make it.
By the way, was that not a fast reaction time?
That was very impressive.
So, I'm a senior in high school, and right now, my board of education is trying, seriously considering the movement to allow trans people or whatever gender they identify with to use that gender-specific bathroom in my school.
So, I'm just trying to figure out what point do we need to have it stop, or what points can you give me to go to the board of education, actually, like rebound against what they're trying to say.
Yeah, that's great, man.
God bless you.
Look, I want to be very clear because I don't want to come across as cruel, but we do not reorganize society based on people's mental conditions, nor should we, okay?
We should give people care, and care is not affirmation.
Care is someone who's willing to tell the truth and challenge them back into what we know to be a flourishing, productive, and happy life.
So, if there is somebody that is a boy that thinks that he is a girl and they want to say they want to have locker room access or whatever, well, then I would point to Loudoun County, Virginia, where a boy who thought he was a girl went into the locker room and twice raped a young lady.
Twice.
That's one example of several that happened across the country.
But here's the one thing, and just to respond to the previous question in a separate way, he says, Well, what difference does it make for you?
And this is one of the most, this is the traps conservatives fall in all the time, which is as if this entire movement stops just acceptance.
That's nonsense.
So, first they ask you to tolerate it, then they ask you to accept it, then they ask you to participate, and then they ask you to celebrate it.
No, celebrate, then participation.
I'll give you an example.
In Oregon, no, it was Vermont.
It was Vermont.
I'm sorry.
In Vermont, there was a woman's sports team, I think it was volleyball or basketball, where a man who thought he was a woman got locker room access.
He started to harass the young ladies on the sports team.
And by doing so, the young ladies then started to complain, saying, I'm uncomfortable with this man.
Can you do something about it?
The administration said the young ladies were being transphobic, even though he was dressing nakedly in a locker room next to other young ladies.
They are now in probation and investigation for being transphobic because they don't accept the naked young man in the locker room because they're not tolerant enough to suck it up, even though a young man harasses them because they don't like being yelled at when they're getting changed in our locker room.
So, let me just kind of put aside any of the name callings you care.
As you can see, I don't care, and you shouldn't either.
There is nothing they could call me, and I hope you, that will make me stop from having young men go into locker rooms and be predators towards our young girls.
There's nothing you could possibly do to me.
Nothing.
And this is also the great lie in like this kind of like we have to have everyone hear their own truth and like all this nonsense is that we end up, we, those of us that believe in normal, basic Western values, having to change all of our customs, all of our language, all of our behavior for a hyper minority.
And it happens because they prey on our great intentions.
Because deep down, I think a lot of us want what's best.
We love people, right?
But stop being so naive.
That's not what's happening anymore.
It's not about loving people and accepting them.
It's about changing your behavior so that they can exert control over you.
That you have to have the right banner or you have to have the right flag in your yard or the right pronoun.
Like, I'm not going to put up with it anymore.
So, all of that to say, advice for you.
Just come after it from a perspective of protecting those that can't protect themselves.
There are multiple documented cases of men that go into female locker rooms.
And the best answer is this.
I've never heard a response to this.
If a man thinks he's a woman, why can't he continue to change in the men's locker room?
He can identify as a unicorn, a dolphin, or whatever.
Why does he need a new locker room exactly?
How is that relevant?
They say, oh, well, because of his mental health.
Answer.
Okay, we don't all starve ourselves at lunch because someone is trying to lose weight.
We don't mass accommodate society because one person has a problem.
It's insane.
And we got to stop putting up with it because, and I'll say this, tolerance is no longer a virtue in America.
I refuse to be tolerant of evil.
And I ask you to join me in that.
Thank you.
If anyone disagrees, you guys can come to the front.
We're going to keep going for a little bit.
Hey, Charlotte, thanks for coming out to Kansas City.
So I'm on the Kansas side.
And as you're aware, we just recently lost a big abortion amendment.
And so besides it being written very poorly, in my opinion, there's a lot of outside media, outside money to get that vote swayed to a no and not a yes.
Could you speak to that and any advice for us pro-lifers to protect the unborn?
Thank you.
Yeah, keep the fight, first of all.
Look, I think a couple dynamics with this.
I think it was poorly written.
I think there was a lot of confusion.
I asked my Kansas audience, and I got a lot of emails of people that said they voted correctly, but a lot of their friends were confused.
I know probably some of you on the Kansas side probably agree it was poorly written.
That's number one.
Number two, I think there was a massive amount of kind of Democrat out of state money and left-wing money post-Dobbs.
But number three is something that I say as someone who's 100% pro-life and talk about it, and I speak at pro-life centers all the time, is I don't think parts of the conservative movement are as pro-life as we think they are.
And that's not an accusation.
Maybe you're in the audience and that might be your position.
That's fine.
But I'm also, I refuse to live under this delusion that everyone on the right is 100% pro-life.
That's not true.
And so politics is one thing.
We got a lot of work to do to explain what it means to be a human being, when human life begins, and why those human beings are necessary and worthy of protection.
Now, I could be wrong.
We're going to learn a lot in the pro-life movement in the next couple of weeks.
Both Kentucky and Montana have very similar measures.
If they fail there, we're going to learn even more.
And so it should be kind of instructive to us of how pro-life actually are the states that we live in.
And we got a lot of work to do.
And I think there's a lot of fear-mongering.
There's a lot of, you know, I think bad moral teaching that comes alongside of it.
But look how far the pro-life movement has come.
A loss in Kansas because of a ballot referendum, like that's that's small.
You guys will get reorganized.
You guys will lick your wounds.
You guys will figure it out.
We got Roe versus Wade repealed.
I mean, come on.
That's huge.
And so we got a lot of work to do.
I think we got a lot of explaining to do, a lot of persuading to do, a lot of persistence, but I'm optimistic, man.
I really am.
And, you know, I want to say that the pro-life movement needs to, of course, talk about solutions and adoption and creating a culture of life and making it easier to adopt in the correct way with the right clearinghouses so that bad people don't adopt kids and abuse them.
That's a very serious concern, which was the good intent behind the bad policy that made the adoptive industry adoptive process, I should say, so bureaucratic and cumbersome.
Cesarean Sections Save Lives 00:02:59
Good intention ended up being a multi-year just thicket.
I know some of you have adopted, and it's very difficult, right?
I don't know how it is in Kansas, but I know in most states it's very, very hard, very bureaucratic, very arduous.
I think if you run it through the church, it's one of the best ways to do it.
And I think it's a way to streamline it and have a clearinghouse.
So keep the fight.
It is the fight that I think will define all the others.
But we've made so much progress.
We were told our whole life that it's inevitable that everyone's going to support abortion.
Now, even the media admits a 50-50 issue.
You understand how big of a deal that is?
Do you know by public opinion polls, we are noticeably more pro-life than we were 20 years ago?
That's awesome.
And so at this trajectory, we're going to have even more victories.
God bless you, man.
Appreciate it.
And I'm from Texas, and then Kansas City Barbecue is better.
Okay, all right.
Hey, Charlie.
Hi.
So I think this might be more of a point of clarification than a legitimate disagreement.
So you started off your talk by saying that you oppose science insofar as it stands in the way of nature or it sort of rewrites nature, right?
Is that like an accurate representation of your point?
It can cause a lot of damage and not done under the proper moral framework.
It's been one of the great killers of modern humanity.
Obviously with, you know, there's been phenomenal breakthroughs in modern medicine.
But continue with your question.
That was actually my question, actually.
Okay, well, there you go.
So, yeah, I mean, you could take, for example, so let's kind of just go back to how science was administered through things that we take for granted, right?
So, for example, Sir Isaac Newton, right?
Force equals mass times acceleration.
Object at rest will stay at rest for every action is equal and opposite reaction, right?
He was a phenomenal Christian, wrote a lot about biblical prophecy and looked at nature as a way to explore God's creation for an intended purpose.
And so, it's all a question of what is the intent, right?
So, I'll give you a great example.
If the intent is to allow human beings to flourish, then I'm all for it.
What's an example of that?
How about a cesarean section?
What an awesome medical breakthrough over the last hundred years.
A cesarean section is, of course, a C-section.
Without getting too graphic, it's a way through medical intervention and progress to save human life with that intended purpose.
Now, obviously, you know, you have to have an incision, you have to be able to, you know, have the proper medication so that the woman doesn't feel it.
It's the most common medical procedure now done in America today.
And so, I'm all for scientific breakthroughs and progress, but that's with the intent of saving a human life, right?
Properly administered, a C-section is life-giving, right?
When you look at other things, there is no life-giving nature to abortion.
So, you look at two very complex surgical procedures: one's an abortion, one's a cesarean section.
Both require a doctor, they require, you know, medication, they require breakthroughs, but they have two completely different moral premises: one to give life and one to take life away.
Abortion Lacks Life Giving Nature 00:03:20
Does that answer your question?
Yeah, it does.
And speaking of abortion, I did have a sort of separate question, if you don't mind.
Yeah.
So, you sort of spoke, you sort of touched on abortion from a moral or philosophical standpoint in your talk.
From a political or cultural standpoint, how do you see the debate playing out in the mid to long term?
Who do you think wins in the long term?
That's a smart question.
I've given this advice to conservatives, which is you have to be realistic about it.
In certain states, in certain areas, it's not a winning issue.
Maybe in a longer period of time, we could do our work and we could persuade people.
But if you're trying to get political power or win an election, you've got to be realistic about whether or not you think that is going to win people over.
And so, some people say, Charlie, you should talk about the issue all the time.
Well, then, how are you ever going to get political power to actually fix the issue, right?
I mean, at some point, you got to be prudent about this.
But I think the left is going to see a surge of support.
I think that's going to happen.
They're going to see a lot of money come in, a lot more activists.
And then I think we as pro-lifers are going to get reorganized, see where we have to go.
I think we have to go on a multi-decade, multi-generation tour, campaign, project of getting into the deep moral and philosophy of it, entertaining questions, doing events.
Because here's the one thing I could tell you is that most people that are pro-abortion have really not heard the best defense of life from a moral standpoint, a biological standpoint, and a scientific standpoint.
But it's going to be a battle, man.
And I think you're going to end up seeing kind of red state, blue state abortion centers across the country where California is poised to make abortion a constitutional right.
And you're going to see a lot of that kind of interstate travel and all that kind of stuff.
So that's my prediction.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Charlie, thank you for being here, first of all, and thank you for everything that you do.
I recently self-published a book on the political and social issues facing our country.
And I covered a lot of the things that you touched on in your speech today: the rise of secularism in our country, how science has turned more into a religion than actual science, the assault on children in our country.
My question for you is: what recommendations, if any, would you have as far as what I could do for marketing my book for someone who doesn't have a large following like yourself?
You're doing a good thing here by being here.
What's the name of your book?
Downfall of America.
There you go.
So you got some plugs there.
Look, the best piece of advice I have is do as much media as you can, show up to events, get to know people.
Look, for the turning point, it is an overnight 10-year success story, right?
Where everyone's like, wow, it's so big, so many chapters, so many students, so much influence, all this.
And look, by the grace of God, we've grown amazingly.
But for those of you that were around, remember five or six years of a lot of scrappiness and a lot of hustle and a lot of events and red-eye flights.
And it's just, you got to put in the work, right?
And then everyone's like, wow, what happened to them so quickly?
Okay, you know, 330 days on the road for 10 years straight, right?
And then you might have a chance to build something where you can get the word out.
I'm not saying you have to do that, but that's what we did.
We were on the road 310, 315, 320, 335 days for a decade.
And then you finally have something that, you know, has been pretty beautiful and awesome and big and lots of staff and 130,000 donors across the country.
It's amazing.
And praise God, but you got to put in the work.
Honor Earthly Parents First 00:09:08
God bless you.
Thank you.
Yeah, of course.
Yeah.
Thank you.
You can go right now.
Thank you.
Love it.
Thank you, men.
God bless you.
Thank you.
And if you disagree, I just want to say it again.
You can come.
Thank you.
Hey, Charlie.
I've noticed in my life and with the political situation and the culture in the world that a lot of people are kind of say blackpilled is a way of saying it.
Like they've completely fallen into despair.
And I noticed myself, I was depressed like my entire life until I realized the core of it was I was an angry, resentful person.
So my question is, and I learned that from Jordan Peterson and the story of Cain and Abel in the Bible.
And I was wondering, you know, what ways could, you know, me personally, because I still struggle with it, and other people, like, how can we prevent ourselves from falling in this kind of angry, resentful feeling that a lot of people I know, a lot of my peers have?
Thank you.
Beautiful question.
Truly.
First thing is gratitude.
Gratitude is the fruit that makes all of the things taste sweet.
We have the most ungrateful generation in American history because we've taught them ingratitude.
You go to most American college campuses, they get a degree in ingratitude.
And if you go through the process of being thankful for something, eventually your mind will go and hopefully will say, thankful to whom?
And that's important too.
So I'm a big believer that the Ten Commandments were given to us as a way not just to prevent against our nature, but make us happier and allow us to flourish.
And I believe the Ten Commandments are instruction manuals for individuals and society.
And the one that I just harp on for young people in particular, and this is one that they don't like to hear, is honor your mother and father.
It is the only one of the Ten Commandments.
It's the only one of the Ten Commandments that involves your nation and a promise because it's not honor your mother and father.
It's honor your mother and father so that you may live long in the land of which you are in.
Now, that word honor is very interesting.
You are not commanded to love your parents.
It does say that in the New Testament, but in the Ten Commandments, it does not say that.
It doesn't have to be to be your parents' friend.
Now, that word honor comes from a Hebrew word, the stem of it, which means heavy.
You must treat them heavily.
You might say, well, that doesn't make any sense.
Well, here's a better way to explain it.
The Hebrew word for curse is the word light.
So if you were to curse something, you would treat them lightly or not seriously.
What the Bible is commanding you is to take your parents seriously, is to take that relationship with heaviness, with intent.
Of course, you might have the worst parents in the history of the world.
They're abusive, they're awful.
Those are very, very few exceptions.
It is not okay to dishonor your parents or treat them lightly if you don't get along with them.
That's not an excuse.
I believe, this is just a side note, that if you cannot honor your earthly parents, you'll not be able to honor your heavenly father.
I believe it is the earthly intermediary step to be able to honor God, God Himself.
And I think as a civilization, we've kind of turned our back on that.
So, kind of also the idea of cynicism and apathy.
Are you a Christian?
Yes, sir.
Awesome.
So, we as Christians are not allowed to be cynical and apathetic.
If you're secular, I have a different answer for you.
But, as definition, as Christians, you have to be hopeful and you have to be optimistic, or else you're not a Christian.
And that requires effort, it requires daily effort where you remind yourself we know how the story ends, that there is eternity waiting for us.
There's a God who loves us, that we're born new.
That changes the black pill really quickly.
And the final thing I'll say with this, which is just kind of a good practice, is that this will not fix all of your problems.
But I am a believer in this with young men in particular: is do not discount your physiology.
What you eat, whether you do drugs, whether you take, you know, do alcohol, you know, how much you sleep, how much are you consuming of screens?
Do you understand how dangerous dopamine addiction and dopamine deficiencies can be?
It won't fix everything because deep down it is a soul problem, but God gave us three parts.
And we talk about the mind and rational arguments, and we talk about the spirit.
But sometimes I think we as Christians do not focus on the body at all.
And there is so much that if you have the posture of alignment that if you take care of your body, you say, I'm not going to drink anymore, I'm not going to do drugs, I'm going to not watch pornography, right?
I'm not going to stare at my screen 10 hours a day, I'm going to eat right and exercise.
All of a sudden, you're going to take your spiritual health more seriously.
And then with it, it comes into alignment.
So I'm a big believer that your physiology could be a big driver towards staying away from cynicism and apathy.
God bless you, man.
Thanks for being here.
God bless you too.
Hey, Charlie, I just want to first issue how offended I am at you having the audacity, the gall to confuse Kansas City, Kansas with Kansas City, Missouri.
We are better.
I knew it was coming.
We are better.
We came first.
We have a Super Bowl-winning team.
So I just want to make clear that you're in Missouri.
Now that sort of brings us to the question in Missouri, like, as you know, we had a trigger law.
So we essentially don't have abortions in Missouri.
So we have a lot of new parents who ostensibly don't feel prepared or feel ready to be parents.
So the question is: what should state governments do, especially in Missouri, to try to alleviate and support these new families?
Great question.
So, first and foremost, I've said this to every pastor as part of TPUSA Faith and every church.
The church has got to step up big time.
And if we're going to talk about pro-life policies from the pulpit, we've got to live out pro-life practices in the streets and with people that need help.
And we have to offer help and aid, pregnancy resources.
There should not be a child in America that gets born post-row where a mom feels as if she's not supported and prayed for and have things supplied to her.
I believe the church will step up.
I really do.
But we need pastors to be clear about it and churches to really embark on that.
The second thing is, state governments have to make the process of adoption less bureaucratic while having the safeguards in place to not allow child abusers and bad people to be able to adopt children, which is a very real concern.
I understand that.
But let's just look at the numbers.
One of the propaganda techniques of the abortionists, they say there will be unwanted children.
There are a million abortions every single year.
Currently, there's 2 million families on the adoption waiting list in America.
So there are twice as many families waiting to adopt in America than there are abortions every single year.
And I believe that number would go to 5 million and 6 million if American Christians were challenged from the pulpit, say, hey, if you have the capacity, if you have the ability, adopt one child to help us live out what we believe, that all human life is made in the image of God.
That's even beyond state governments.
I think the state government, though, needs to make it easier to have children.
I think that we need to have a whole pro-life agenda be put in place.
And praise God for the trigger law.
But I don't think it's enough to just say, okay, you know, abortion is gone and we turn our back on it.
We got to live out the pro-life policies in everything we do.
If you'll humor a follow-up question.
Really quick because we're running out of time.
So you mentioned mainly about like church, like what religious organizations should do to support new families.
And you mentioned abortion or not abortion, adoption.
Yes, that's right.
Freudian slip there.
What do you think of, say, Missouri's new bill in the House that will expand Medicaid protection to like pregnant women?
Do you think there should be more, like financially, on like the financial level to support these new families?
Yeah, I'd have to look at it.
I'm a bigger believer, if necessary, instead of doing Medicaid, which is government health insurance, I'm a bigger believer in doing what Milton Friedman would argue, which is if you're going to give aid, give it in a form of universal basic income to a very specific group.
I think that gives more agency and more choice.
Milton Friedman was a big believer in that.
Government insurance through Medicaid is awful.
It's like the worst.
Medicaid can save people's lives, but the quality is low and there's tons of fraud and a lot of inefficiencies.
I have to look at the bill there.
But I do think, I believe this, there is a potential role for the state to step up to make it easier for babies to be able to flourish and live post-row.
I do believe that.
Thank you.
God bless you.
Hi.
This is on the abortion topic as well.
Would you say 70% of Americans think abortion is okay up to a certain point?
I think that's probably right.
Okay.
So personally, I am pro-life.
I think life begins at conception.
But I think we are a small minority.
And I'm almost to the point where to do something, I would give in to a certain number of weeks.
I know Lindsey Graham said 15.
You know, and to me, one day doesn't make you human, and the next day you're not.
You know, it's just an embryo and a fetus.
It's just a stage of life.
It's all life.
If you today, and maybe not in the future, and I think part of it is people that are in favor of abortion don't really realize what it is.
When you say, do you know they rip your arms?
Stop Exploiting Hispanic Culture 00:08:37
I don't want to hear about it.
They don't want to acknowledge what it is.
Is there a week or a day that you would concede so that we don't have, you know, yeah, so I would agree in a step towards the goal of abolition, right?
I mean, I think if there was a 14-week ban, great first step.
But I'll never not be clear the goal is complete and total abolition.
Like, I'm not going to back it up.
But do I think a 14-week ban would be a beautiful thing?
Of course, obviously, especially versus the late-term nonsense we see in a lot of these states.
But without the vision, without a vision, people perish.
And abortion is a crime against humanity.
And I'm not going to back away from that.
So I know.
So you'd agree you'd give a little.
Of course, yeah.
I mean, you ought to be prudent, right?
You got to be realistic.
Yeah.
But I'm also not going to act as if the movement's over and we're going to stop campaigning.
We're going to stop, you know, persuading.
But it would be imprudent not to take progress, right?
Even though you have a broader goal in mind.
So, of course.
God bless you.
Thank you.
Hi.
So you mentioned earlier, I have kind of a maybe complicated question.
I agree with some of the points you made and I kind of disagree.
You mentioned earlier something about like the love yourself movement is just really bad.
And I would say I agree with like a lot of self-reflection and like gives so much anxiety and depression to our generation because it's all just like me, me, me all the time.
But at the same time, like, do you feel like there's a balance between loving yourself?
Because I know that's helped me and that's helped many people be more comfortable with themselves and not have anxiety and have more, you know, comfortability with the people around them and themselves.
Like, do you feel like there's like you have to be extreme one way or another, or like there's.
I'm glad it helped you.
That's awesome.
But I don't think we should teach it to our children.
Right.
So I'll give you an example.
If a poster said something like, in a fourth-grade classroom, you're perfect the way you are.
Do you think that's a good message?
Like, what would your opinion?
Just think about it.
You disagree with that.
You disagree with it.
You and me both, right?
We agree.
Because to tell a fourth grader you're perfect the way you are, why would they go to school, right?
Like, why would they keep on studying and why would they keep on improving?
Now, what you're getting at, though, is being gentle towards oneself and not being harsh on oneself.
That's different than self-love because I'm a big believer in self-respect.
And that's completely different than self-love.
I always want to make sure I have respect towards myself.
Self-love is narcissism.
Self-respect is, I don't want to do a series of behaviors or choices where I might look at myself in the mirror and say, I'm not happy the way I acted.
Does that make sense?
So self-love can get into hyper-Eastern infatuation with your own being and the energy within, which if it helps you, praise God.
I know it's helped a lot of people, but I don't think we should teach our children that.
I think it could do a lot more damage than good.
Does that make sense?
Yeah, for sure.
Thank you.
Thank you.
God bless you.
Hi, Charlie.
I go to Staley High School up north, just north of the river.
I live in Kansas City, and I do an after-school program at an elementary school.
And while I'm walking through these halls of the elementary school, I see a lot of symbolism of LGBTQ, love yourself, rainbows all over the walls.
And I came up with a question: I want to know: if you were a senator or a congressman, how would you tackle LGBTQ indoctrination in elementary schools?
Yeah, so I think it should be totally outlawed.
It shouldn't be in our schools at all whatsoever.
What do I mean by that?
You shouldn't have queer theory, LGBTQ imagery, or signage in a school.
It just shouldn't exist.
And, you know, I, and by the way, it doesn't stop there.
And that's the thing you might say, oh, I'm okay with, you know, gay flags and trans flags all over classrooms, of which I am not.
But it doesn't stop there.
You then have video after video after video of teachers that are admitting they use their platform and they use their position to try to change kids' belief or sexuality and all this nonsense.
But yeah, I mean, there is a role for politics here.
There is a rule for lawmakers, a role for lawmakers, which first and foremost to restore parents' rights.
And then we also got to ask the question: what is the purpose of education?
And it kind of goes back to like the love yourself are kids right.
If the purpose of education is to give kids what they want, well, then we got education totally backwards.
The classical view of education that built Western civilization is you know very little and you have a lot of work to do.
But if you apply yourself, we can go on a journey together to go find out what is good, true, and beautiful in the world.
Now we tell kids, you're perfect.
You're great.
Said differently.
In the 1960s, we used to tell kids, you're the problem and America is great.
Now we say you're great and America's the problem.
And we got to change that.
It has to be a complete, total posture change in how we do education.
Education comes from a Latin word, which means to lead forth.
So you got to lead forth towards something.
And I want that leading forth towards truth, not gender confusion and identity issues.
And I hope our elected officials do that.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Hello, Charlie.
I'm wondering, what do you think is the most important message that can come from the Hispanic community towards both parties?
Thank you for being here.
I think Hispanics need to yell from the rooftops that we're not going to put up with white liberal domination of American society.
And I say white liberal intentionally because there is a disproportionate amount of the nonsense that just is venom in our society from a small group of white liberals that tell Hispanic and black people that they must live a certain way.
And so the one thing I would love to see the Hispanic community do is reassert itself as being a parents movement, loving their children and traditional values.
It is insane, I think, that we teach kids that men can become pregnant.
And I think every Hispanic in America agrees.
I would love to see even more nonsense.
I don't know if you agree, this Latinx thing, I think, is the most insane thing.
It comes from a white liberal is what it comes from.
And so I would love to see kind of that opposition movement and both parties.
This is what I would love to see Hispanics say, is stop taking our culture as if it's something for your own political purposes.
I don't think conservatives are doing that at all.
I think that liberals do it all the time.
They think they own Hispanics.
They think they control them.
They think they could tell them what to do.
They use it as political footballs all the time.
And I want Hispanics to say, you know what, you don't own us, actually.
We're our own community and we love our children.
We love God.
We love hard work.
We love the police and you don't represent us.
That's what I'd love to see from the Hispanic community.
Really quick, we're running out of time.
It comes across very condescending and arrogant.
And it comes across as if we're not capable of doing things.
I agree.
God bless you.
Thank you.
We're a long way from Arizona, man.
I'm actually from here.
I interviewed Carrie Lake on my podcast recently.
So my question, I was scrolling through Instagram recently, and I came across a picture of a grown adult male trying to breastfeed his child or someone else's child.
I'm not sure.
I believe that the transgenderism agenda is very, very inherently evil.
I was discussing this with the kind man that decided to flip all of us off and charge you.
And he said that there's not an agenda.
Well, there very clearly is if we look at this picture.
What do we do, especially my age group?
What do we do to stand up against this and really say no besides just saying it's wrong?
Yeah.
Look, I think we also got to elevate, you know, what is the solution, right?
Which is we want children to be able to flourish.
You know, we don't want people to live in mental terror.
We don't think that we don't take that lightly.
And are there other implications?
I mean, so for example, you know, for the young gentleman that all decided to charge me and the whole thing, is the question would also be, do you think there might be other mental conditions that might be at play other than gender dysphoria, right?
Maybe?
Like, do you think maybe there were too many psychiatric medications given of benzodiazepans and Xanax, Adderall?
You know that there are 4 million kids under the age of 18 on incredibly manipulative psychoactive drugs.
Now, maybe you're one of them, maybe you support it, maybe your kids are.
I'm not here to, you know, judge.
That's not my position.
Religion Can Drive Bad Acts 00:06:18
But we probably should say 4 million is too much.
Like, that's a lot, right?
You just read the black box warning on some of these drugs, they can have huge implications, and these are developing minds and neurocircuits that are not yet completed.
And so that's what I would say.
And I just think that there needs to be kind of a revitalization of, you know, what is the goal, which is a restoration of the Western nuclear family, which is the bedrock of so much of our flourishing.
We got to get to the next question.
God bless you, man.
Thank you.
I'll do a couple more.
We'll go a little over time if you guys want me to, because I screwed up the states.
Yeah, I want you to go over time.
Are you familiar with Christopher Hitchens?
Yeah, the atheist.
So Christopher Hitchens' statement is that while religion may occasionally make bad people do good things, if you want to get good people to do bad things, you use religion.
How would you respond to that?
So do you hold that view or just curious?
Oh, you do?
Okay.
Well, what is good?
Well, anything that benefits people.
I mean, I'm not.
Okay, but I'm not really, I don't really have a cogent definition of good, but there are certainly plenty of examples where religious differences have been leveraged to create horrendous atrocities.
Yeah, just the question is what is horrendous and what is good, right?
So absent of belief in God, how do you have a definition of good?
What benefits mankind?
Yeah, so Hitler thought killing Jews benefits mankind.
Was he wrong?
Hitler was also a Catholic and promoted the...
Not a very good one.
And also was promoting his sort of the pagan Germanic religion.
Yeah, so Stalin was an atheist who went to seminary, denounced God, killed 40 million people, but who's to say they're wrong?
They said they were benefiting humanity.
Well, I think you can make that, you can argue against that based on using science.
How?
Well, the more diversity you have, the more likely you are to survive.
What?
I don't quite understand.
I'm curious.
By eliminating diversity.
So evolution is descent through modification and survival of the fittest.
So the more genetic variation you have, the more likely you are to develop at least some part of that population that would be able to withstand any sort of environmental change.
So genocides, I think from a scientific standpoint, you can't use science to support that.
Okay, so then why was there a lot of literature supporting eugenics?
Because people are stupid.
Oh, I agree, right?
So, but then, so you're saying science.
Okay, so that's an interesting question.
So you think Darwinism can support an agreed-uponism?
Because Darwin never used origin of species, like his.
But that's not Darwinism, that's evolution.
Okay, so how about the moral idea that the survival of the fittest?
Well, it's not really a moral idea.
It's a kind of a fact.
Oh, okay.
Interesting.
So I kind of get.
But you can make the case that.
So I think there are people who would say, well, if you have people who are sort of have genetic defects that they shouldn't be allowed to survive, I think that's horrendous.
But why?
Why do you have that belief?
Again, this idea behind genetic diversity.
Yeah, but if someone has a low IQ, aren't they kind of just like a strain on society?
Why wouldn't we eliminate them?
You can't predict on the basis, certainly of IQ.
Oh, sure, we can.
We do it all the time.
We do chromosomal testing.
I mean, in Iceland, they've gotten rid of kids with Downs.
Down syndrome.
Do you agree with that?
No.
Why?
Because those folks with Down syndrome lead full and full lives that aren't.
They require someone to support them, so shouldn't we eliminate them?
Not all of them.
Why?
By what more?
Hold on.
Down syndrome is a spectrum.
It's not simply a trisomy 21.
It's a lot more complicated.
But I'm getting at a point here, which eventually it's going to be your opinion versus mine of what is good.
Okay, but I think you can make you can qualify good scientifically.
Right, but the scientific good in Iceland is Down syndrome, are a strain on the environment, strain on resources.
They're unproductive.
They can't produce.
So we might as well eliminate them, right?
Well, I would say that's a mistake.
They don't.
But their scientists disagree.
So by what standard is good good?
Who are their scientists?
The international world community is doing this all.
Let me ask you another question, though.
Do you believe in the Big Bang?
Yes.
So you believe that time, space, and matter had a definitive beginning?
Yes.
Okay, so by definition, shouldn't therefore the thing that caused time, space, and matter be outside of time, space, and matter?
No, that's of concern.
So you don't believe in Newtonian physics?
No, actually, I don't.
I believe more in quantum physics because...
Okay, so you don't believe for every action there's an equal and opposite reaction?
Newtonian physics works well on large scales, but it.
Yeah, the universe is pretty large, dude.
Wait, the Big Bang rests on quantum mechanics.
Not applied by Newtonian physics, because it's the largest possible scale imaginable.
So how exactly did the Big Bang happen if there wasn't someone that effectuated the Big Bang?
Okay, so it's a bit complicated.
It has to do with quantum...
No, I'm not saying that.
No, it's actually not.
It's that the only thing that could have made something that is space-time and matter is something that transcends space-time and matter, aka a God.
That's the only explanation.
There are plenty of folks who would disagree.
But can I just one more?
Have you ever heard of body integrity identity disorder?
No.
Okay, so it's a disorder where people believe that they have some physical defect, a leg amputation, a spinal cord injury, but they are perfectly normal.
So these people tend to seek surgeons to perform.
No surgeon would ever do it because they would lose their license.
I would advance the idea that people that do gender reaffirming surgery on minors should also lose their licenses.
Ideology Oppresses Black America 00:06:03
You and I agree on that, my friend.
Thank you.
And I'll say one last thing to you.
Without God, there would be no atheists.
Thank you so much for your work.
I'll just ask two quick questions.
As a passionate Christian and patriot, and just I would say an everyday Joe that I am a businesswoman, churchgoer, I feel intimidated and discouraged so many times seeing the power of our culture.
As you said, on every Starbucks, our social media, everywhere we go, there's this Goliath in our face.
And I just wanted to see if you could empower all of us with just some points as a Gideon's army on how we can continue to take a stand for conservatism.
And if you, if Turning Point has, my juices are so stirred and I'm so excited that I want to be able to answer transgenderism.
I haven't studied all of the points, but does your organization have something where we can learn how to be effective in really responding to this?
Yeah, and I got to kind of hat tip the experts.
I got to tell you, Matt Walsh's documentary, What is a Woman, is one of the best pieces of film.
Is that not the greatest thing?
And I don't pretend to be the leading voice on that topic because I have to carry, you know, we do radio, so I have to talk about 100 issues a day.
But I really encourage you.
He does, his podcast is great, and I think he's done more scholarship on this issue in a persuasive, entertaining way than almost anybody else.
I would point you in that direction.
And also, don't give up, hope.
We got the truth.
Have courage.
Courage is the ultimate virtue.
Without courage, there are no other virtues.
And I'll tell you, I think our best days are ahead in that way.
God bless you.
Thank you.
Next question.
Is this the final question?
Yes, final question.
Okay.
Best for last.
But my question is: I debate often with people of color that look like me that they shouldn't support like BLM and all that nonsense.
So no, they haven't accepted my ideals.
So what would be the best counter-argument for them to just stop supporting defunding police or reparations or things like that?
Are those popular arguments you hear?
Yeah.
Yeah.
Okay.
Well, first, are you a conservative?
I'm a Christian.
Yes.
God bless you, man.
Thank you.
And that's very, I want to say that I don't want to put words in your mouth, but I can imagine you receive some ridicule for those positions.
What are you called?
Trans folk.
Well, and definitely in high school, I came out as a Christian.
So people started debating me on my how I believed.
And it was just, I would set up these debates and it would be, it would just be awful.
Like I'd be called a bunch of names.
It never affected me much, but it was just so interesting to see their rhetoric not have a civil discourse with me.
Yes.
Yeah.
So look, I would say this: that I would focus on talking to, you know, other black Americans.
I would ask them, I'd say, has the reign of white liberals since the 1960s benefited our community?
Forget all this systemic racism stuff.
You guys want to talk about racism?
How about the reign of white liberals that Malcolm X warned us about?
Great society program, woke ideology, destruction of our family.
They want to play the race card all the time.
Who's been in charge of black cities the last 60 years?
It's not rural farmers in western Kansas or Missouri.
It's.
No, instead, it's been white liberals.
It's been a project of the white liberal and for the white liberal.
And it's hyper-academic ideology, abstractions.
And here's the one thing I would say: which is try to be real.
This is one of the reasons why I think that black America is going to have a conservative renaissance at some point, is that these ideas require you at times to go through to get a PhD.
They're so insane.
Men can become pregnant.
America is systemically racist.
You know, when you walk the streets in the cities, you're like, actually, we could use more cops.
You don't have to go listen to some sort of abstract thinker about why police systemic racism, all that nonsense.
So just be real.
Talk about things that matter.
In black America, you talk about how we need a restoration of nuclear families.
And ask the question: why is this the case?
It's because of the reign of terror of white liberals.
It's not white conservatives.
It's not this mega semi-fascist people.
No, no, no.
It is the ideology of the woke that has imposed themselves on black America.
If that's really they want to go, I'll tell you, they've done more damage than any other community, and I think you could turn it on them.
God bless you for being here tonight, man.
Thank you.
All right.
Well, that was fun, wasn't it?
Loved coming here.
I want to thank the university for hosting us and for making it so good.
Thank you to our security.
Thank you to Turning Point USA.
Just some closing thoughts.
Make sure you are registered to vote and you do vote and get your friends out to vote.
Very, very important.
And I just want to kind of close on this, which is you being here tonight.
You are the remnant.
You are the vanguard.
You matter so much.
We are doing at Turning Point USA on high school campuses, on college campuses.
It's the front lines.
You see what they have to deal with.
It's hard.
It's tough.
And I hope that inspires some of you that are not in college, be like, you know what?
I can fight a little bit.
I can organize.
We are on pace to have 1,000 high school chapters across America at Turning Point USA.
It's an amazing accomplishment and milestone.
And the work we're doing is going to preserve and restore a free America.
It really is.
Come to America Fest in Phoenix right before Christmas.
Tucker Carlson, Tim Poole, country music artists, Candace Owens, amfest.com.
It's in Phoenix.
You will not regret it.
It's going to be the greatest event of the entire year.
Stay involved with Turning Point USA and ask yourself the question: what am I going to do in the next three weeks to make sure America is a free country?
That's a question you just have to ask yourself.
Whatever the answer to that is, is your proper answer.
Commit yourself to truth, and we're honored at Turning Point USA to fight alongside of you.
God bless you guys.
Thank you so much.
Thanks so much for listening, everybody.
Email me directly, freedom at charliekirk.com.
Thanks so much for listening.
God bless.
For more on many of these stories and news you can trust, go to CharlieKirk.com.
Export Selection