Abortion with Mark Spence

I want to bring you back in. I want to ask you one burning question. You're a biologist. I have two biologists here. I have a burning question that has been asked recently. I'm wondering if you can help out with.

I know that this can't be answered by Supreme Court justices. What is a woman?

Oh, you do not want me to go down this road because sex determination and development, I mean, Dr. Jensen is probably more familiar with developmental biology than I am. But that's a really complicated question, especially when you consider the complexities of human biology.

Look, I actually do, I talk in class about sex determination, chromosomal determinants, hormonal determinants, genetic determinants. What determines sex? See, there's no short, there is no answer to that question that I could answer in the time that we have tonight.

Really? It is a really complicated question. It is a really complicated question.

So it's not a question of chromosome X versus Y. 100 no.

100 no. You can ask me the question 12 different ways if you want, but you're going to get the same answer each time.

I don't think it's all that complex. I would answer it very simply. A woman is what God who created the women defines it as. God created her, he gets to give the definition. So it's a woman is what God calls a woman.

One, two, three.

Opening the Show and Setting Up the Night

Welcome to Apologetics Live. We're here to answer your questions and challenges about God and the Bible. Meet your hosts from Striving for Eternity Ministries, Andrew Rappaport, Dr. Anthony Silvestro, and Pastor Justin Pierce.

Well we are live, Apologetics Live, here to answer your challenging questions, concerns, whatever you have. You got a challenge for us? Come on in, go to ApologeticsLive .com. That is where you'll find the link to participate.

This is a ministry of Striving for Eternity. Hope you guys enjoyed that intro that we gave there because we will be addressing some of that here tonight. Before we do, let me give you a layout of what we're going to be doing tonight.

Tonight we're going to have actually two different folks come in. If you were here last week, we tried desperately to get a friend of ours, Les Lansphere, to come in and talk about his new film that he's putting together, Cessationist, and he just was traveling and we couldn't make it work.

So we're going to have him in for the first hour. Second hour we got a friend of ours, Mark Spence from Living Waters. You may know of that ministry from the TV series that was done on Way of the Master.

And so he's going to come in. We're going to talk evangelism. We're going to talk abortion, prepare people how to make good arguments against abortion, because once the Supreme Court rules that abortion is outlawed, or we'd hope that, I guess they're not going to go that far, but they're going to at least leave it to the states.

And I think that that is going to be a hot button issue for us to address and know how to defend. So that's going to be the second hour. Pastor Justin will be coming in. And so I want to bring in my friend Les Lansphere here.

How are you.

Doing, sir? I'm doing so well. Thank you so much for having me. You can have me on.

Your show more often. This is awesome. I agree. I agree. So before we get to the film, we said we'd bring you in on this. We want to do our In the News segment here, folks. And I don't know if you've seen this.

This is what we have for the In the News segment. But you guys are familiar with the, basically the shooting that happened down there in Texas at the school. A lot of people are familiar with it. A lot of people have questions with this.

It doesn't seem to make sense. The police were there. They were there like almost immediately. They didn't go in for over an hour. A mother is trying to go in and she's held back. You end up having someone who I guess it was a border patrol agent who ended up going in and shooting this guy.

But the police didn't go in and people are asking why there's all this confusion. Well, today I ran across this article in the news from Daily Wire. Police officer, husband of slain teacher was detained, disarmed while trying to rescue wife.

So here's the here's the story here. One of the teachers that died, her husband was a police officer there. He was rushing in to try to save his wife. She supposedly called him and informed him that she was shot and bleeding out.

And the other police officers stopped him, disarmed him and then detained him so he couldn't go in to save his wife. And she died. We now are finding out that the doors were not locked. The police could have gone in.

And even more that the police had a tool that would allow them to break in if they had to, if it was locked and they didn't. There is a policy that if there's if there's children, there's an officer has said that he was saying we must go in because there's children.

Other officers go, well, we don't know if there's anyone in there. They were waiting for someone to give an order. There's folks, there's only one way. I'm going to say this, Les, you know what I'm going to say, because I want I did.

I wanted to run by because I don't want you to go, dude, you're off your rocker. But you didn't. You actually agreed with this conclusion, because there's only one way that I can see to explain what we're seeing here in this.

Somebody and I want and I think the investigation needs to be who this person was. Somebody did not let those police officers in. Somebody told them to stand down because they went against policy. Why?

People are saying they're coward. They're afraid for their life. People don't become police officers and do what they do because they're afraid. OK, Chris, I know you're watching. You're a police officer.

Have you were you trained to be afraid for your life or to run into danger?

That's what they're trained for. So what's your conclusion, Andrew? So here's here's the.

Only conclusion that that I can I can see makes sense. I believe that somebody told those officers to stand down so that children would die so that the politicians can push.

Gun control. I know it seems crazy. I get it. I don't think I don't think it seems as crazy as you think. I think that 2020 and on has broken people so much that I think this is this is nobody wants to talk about how natural it is to automatically think exactly what you just said, because these people are untrustworthy.

And and the more the facts come out about this story, especially like you feel so deceived, like we were told so many lies about this story in particular, how these brave officers did all these things and they tried all these keys to get a door that turned out wasn't locked, that they were holding people back, that the cop was in the hallway.

He got the call from his own wife to go in and they made him they he becomes detained, like as if he was breaking the law to go into the room as a police officer to save those kids and his own wife. It's absolutely insane.

So, yeah, there's got to be some kind of some kind of stick thing going on. And then you see, you know, like all these busts and raids going on with conservatives all over the country. And then it looks like they're all FBI agents.

Like, yeah, something very strange is going on. And I think it's if anybody's actually paying attention, I think we're all being forced to become conspiracy theorists because these things look pretty obviously like a conspiracy.

Yeah, I mean, look, after what we saw on January 6th, which there's no way to explain that other than the fact that the Democrats wanted to stop the the voting that was going to happen because they knew that there was going to be a vote to audit and they didn't want the audit.

And if folks, anyone listening, you don't believe me, you just have to follow the timetable. When you look at that, when you look at the timetable, they had to wait until, you know, the vote was declared for Arizona.

And there were 17 Republicans that were going to ask for an audit. There was a procedural way of doing it. They would have had I think it was a 10 or 15 day audit and that would have forced an audit. Yeah.

Soon as Arizona gets up, what ends up happening? Arizona ends up they announce and then all of a sudden the police come in at that exact moment to stop it and say, we got to get you to safety. But here is the problem.

No one was in the building at that time. Oops. How did the Capitol police know people were going to be in the building? And they moved them not to the secure location. And if you see all those pictures where it looks all violent and it's all in that tunnel.

And if you watch the footage that we've seen, you end up seeing that that is right where they bring Congress right through there with all the windows barricaded up because all the other doors they opened.

You know, there's no barricades. It's just that one area where it's barricaded and it looks really bad and looks and all the Congress are like, oh, this was tragic. What happened today? And the Republicans caved.

They did not call for the audit when they got back. So either the police knew this was going to happen.

How did they know they were ushering people into the building? I mean, clearly something was.

Going on. I think they ushered them in the building because they realized like, oh, these people aren't breaking it like these. These are not like Black Lives Matter protesters who bash in the windows like there's something wrong here.

We have to open the door so people come in so that there's people in the building. So because if there was no one in the building, if they never entered the building, how how would they explain why they stopped?

We got to move you guys because there's people breaking into the building and there's violence.

Yeah. And then just the absolute brilliance of this is what makes me think that, you know, this is just Satan pulling strings behind the scenes. Nobody's smart enough to operate this way. And that's the really crazy thing about conspiracies, like once they get up to a level where it's like, wait a second, nothing could ever be this orchestrated.

Well, unless there's something supernatural going on behind the scenes that that, you know, has more knowledge of things than you do. So, you know, like you do something like January 6th, you set this whole thing up clearly, at least to some degree, there's just something devious going on behind the scenes.

And then you use that same event that got you the result you wanted at the time, and then you keep doubling down on that same event over and over and over. And now we got primetime trials because they will not let this thing go because it's this, we see it as this opportunity to basically make being a Republican illegal.

Well, they said, I mean, it was.

Interesting because one of one of the people in the committee said, like this, we need to do this primetime. So this changes people's minds when they get to the voting booth. Oh, really? Maybe that's why Nancy Pelosi handpicked who could be on this.

Like the Republicans couldn't pick the Republican representatives for this committee, you know, just interesting. But yeah, I think the only way to explain this is they wanted to push gun control and someone was willing to let children die.

And if you think that your government isn't willing to do that, yeah, just 2020 is enough said, you know, all the nonsense we're going through. So with that, before we get to your film, I do have to, I do have to play a little clip we and you guys heard in the beginning, I want to go back to a previous, previous show.

And, you know, for you, Les, this may be the first time that you get to see this, but I just want to replay from the time that we had Dr. Jensen on because I got an email that we want to interact with.

So this was part of the discussion where I would know. And I want to, okay, I want to bring you back in. I want to ask you one, one burning question, not one, but you're a biologist. I have two biologists here.

I have a burning question that has been asked recently. I'm wondering if you can help out with, I know that, I know that this has, it can't be answered by Supreme court justices. What is a woman?

Oh, you do not want me to go down this road because sex determination and development. I.

Mean, okay, no, I just want to stop this. It just, just, just smiles on everyone's faces. He's really like, this was, I told Dr. Jensen, I was going to ask him this question, but just like, we're just like, wow, wow.

This is, this is classic. This is where the world has.

Gone. So here are the rest of his answer. Dr. Jensen is probably more familiar with developmental biology than I am, but that's a really complicated question, especially when you consider the complexities of human biology.

I wouldn't go down that road, but I mean, it's already almost 1115. How much time is that? So we may have to have you come back just for that. Then I look, I actually do. I talk in class about sex determination, chromosomal determinants, hormonal determinants, genetic determinants.

What determines, what determines sex? I see. That's a, that there's no short, there is no answer to that question that I could answer in the time that we have tonight. Just look at Anthony's face. It is a really complicated.

Question. It is a really complicated, not a question of chromosome X versus Y. 100%. No, no. Okay. So, so, so here'd be a question. Oh, is it the bone structure? It's, it's multi. Okay. So let me stop this and say, why did I ask that question?

Cause this is Apologetics Live. We want to teach you guys how to do Apologetics. Why did I ask that question? Because this is a, this is a question people are not asking. He wasn't ready for that. That's the type of questions you want to think of when you're doing Apologetics.

Because you're saying like archaeologists look at bones and they know if it was male or female because bone structure is male or female. Correct. That's how they determine it. And.

I'm going to give the example of Lucy and what you're going to hear is he's, he's now stuck between what has been taught for all these years and what they're trying to teach. They're saying this is a psychological thing, but yet the bone structure, he's going to have to say, well, bone structure teaches men, male and female.

You don't have 52 different genders of a bone structure. Right. And, and he's going to have to, you're going to, because he got caught. This is what you want to do when you, when you are doing Apologetics, don't give the same, this guy's brilliant.

Right. He's got his PhD in biology. So he's, he's obviously very smart. And I will say very cordial. I really appreciated the conversation the two of them had. And that's why I just took Anthony and I out during that show and just let them go back and forth.

I thought it was a great conversation. Much of it probably went over people's heads. You know, what, what it did reveal is that, you know, on two occasions, he Dr. Dan revealed that he doesn't really, didn't really know and didn't really read what he said he read and didn't really know what he said he understood of Dr. Jensen's work, but he admitted that Dr. Jensen did know his work.

So it's exactly what Dr. Jensen predicted and he fulfilled it. But when we do Apologetics, it's fine to ask the, you know, XXXY go down that road. Do you think I'm going to be able to win a debate with a guy who's got his PhD in biology over the issues of chromosomes X and Y?

No, because he's going to throw so much at me, it's going to go over my head. And anyone listening would would just is going to naturally side with him. So what did I choose to do? We're not on an equal playing field.

He's way above me in this area. But I'm going to appeal to common sense to things that he hasn't had to think through. And bone structure is one of them. That's why I went that road. So let's listen to it.

When we go back and we look at, say, Lucy, we can't really know if that's really a girl,.

Right? We can develop mentally be reasonably certain based on the proportions of certain bones, specifically like hips, pelvis, that kind of thing. We can be reasonably certain about it.

So do you see he's he's this is this is the professor in him, right? He's a he's a Rutgers professor. And he's he's appealing to what is true. That's why I asked that question. I asked the question because I wanted to get him to to end up in the area of having to teach what he knows to be true.

And now he's so he's saying we'd be reasonably what we'd be reasonably because that.

Is the bone structure. Yeah, you can't see her brain. So how can you be reasonably certain of.

Anything? Yeah. So in some cases, but not in others, it's not a 100 thing. Okay. Like, yeah. All right, ask me the question 12 different ways if you want, but you're going to get the same.

Answer each time. Yeah, well, I want to have just for that, because I don't think it's all that complex. I would answer it very simply. A woman is what God who created the women defines it as God, God created or he gets to give the definition.

So it's a woman is what God calls a woman. And so that was that was a clip that we had from that week. Well, what ended up happening was Dr. Cardinal took that whole one hour segment between the two of them, Dr. Jensen and him.

And he had lifted that completely and put it on his YouTube channel. That's actually called illegal. It's a copyright infringement. And now he had two other videos where he's played clips and he's commenting.

That's fine. That's fair use. And he could do that. But you cannot steal someone's property. And so I flagged it when I had discovered it. And I got an email. And that is interesting, because if you watch that show, folks, you saw that I had invited him.

I gave him my email address. He had it. We had dialogue back and forth in private chat. He had my email. He said, you know, he'd contact me and I don't hear from him. And so on some of his videos, I pointed out because he was saying he'd be happy to talk to Dr. Jensen.

And I said we would set it up. We could we could set that up. But he was, you know, saying that he was willing. Well, he didn't email me. So I pointed that out. So I got this email. Next morning, after I put the copyright infringement, he said, Andrew, thanks.

Thanks again for having Dr. Jensen on and giving us so much time to talk. Like I said in my comment, I'm in the middle of summer class, actually nearing the end grading final exams will be how this week ends for me.

But after next week, I'll be more available if you have some time to talk about evolution or be grilled about evolution. And I'd be I'd be happy to be there in person. So let me stop in his email and address that part.

So first off, I was probably in I was anticipating him contacting me right away. Did not realize he was busy. So when I commented on his YouTube channel, I'm I was doing it as if, hey, he's saying he's available to you.

He wants to do this, but he did. He's not making himself available. Well, he was busy. I didn't know that. So that would you know, so I I was the comment I made on his channel wouldn't have been that he's so you know, he's avoiding and it may have come off that way because that's how I had understood it.

But I was wrong. So because we like to have things correct here. And if I'm wrong, I admit to it. So, but, you know, we did offer for him to come in. And we even offered for, you know, he and Dr. Silvestro to do it to do a debate on evolution.

We offered to do it in person. So we'll see if that happens. I don't think it will. We'll see. So he goes on and says, but if you're looking for someone to talk about sex and gender, and specifically transgender issues, what you should do is reach out to a trans woman, or perhaps a healthcare provider who specializes in, for example, trans youth.

I can speak fluently in the general terms of sex determination, but I'm not qualified to provide specific answers you'd probably want. Plus, generally, better to have members of a specific community or someone close to it speak for themselves.

Now I'm going to stop there. And that's a brilliant, that's just brilliant to have in writing. Why? Understand this, his channel, his YouTube channel is about is like creation myths. Now, I did ask him one question over and over again, is truth and consistency important?

He never answered that question. I think because he can't. Why? If he's going to hold his own standard, he cannot have a channel called creation myths, unless he has creationists on the channel. You see, he doesn't have experts in it.

He can't, he's saying he's not qualified to speak in these things. And generally, it's better to have someone of that specific group. So if you're going to have a channel devoted to creationists, then you should have creationists on the channel.

I mean, that would be the thing. So a biologist can't actually answer this question. And we have to go back to the, the child gender doctors, the ones that Matt Walsh interviewed that can't answer the question.

So, so who's, who can answer this question? I just, I just don't know.

Well, it's, he's, he's telling us who can answer it. Only a trans woman can tell you what a woman is. Not a woman. Someone who identifies as a woman is biologically a woman. She can't answer it. You have to have a trans woman or someone who works with trans youth.

Why?

So it's not only that, it's not only that trans women are women, it's that only trans women are.

Women. No, it's only trans women can define what a woman is. Right. Because, well, but,.

But that's because they're a part of the group. So only trans women are women. Yeah. Biological women are no longer women. Exactly. Exactly. Right. I mean, this is what you end up seeing.

Here is what we end up seeing is, and, and I see Mark Spencer, Mark, if you want to join in early, you can come on in early. I see him. He's watching. He was like, Hey, at nine, you, if you're, if you're here, you could jump in because you probably have some great things on this as well.

But as you, as you, what you want to do when you have arguments like this, folks is break it down. Look at what he's actually saying. What he's actually arguing is that he's saying he, as a biologist, so we have a justice, a Supreme court justice who says she can't answer what a woman is, by the way, she is a woman.

She was specifically picked for that job because she was a woman. She like, right. She had to be a black woman. So she can't define what a woman is, but that's what got her the job. And she can't answer it.

She says, biologists have to answer it. A biologist says he can't answer it. You need a trans woman to answer it. Well, there's a fallacy here. There's actually a couple of fallacies one and granted Dr. Cardinale, his expertise is in the area of biology.

Mine is in philosophy and logic. So we'll go. So, so this is where I will be. Maybe I don't know his background. Maybe he does have a background in that. He, we have a, we have a fallacy of identity. We have a fallacy of begging the question.

So the fallacy of identity is that you, there are definitions of things and what something is, is what it is. You can't change that. Here comes our brother, Mark Spence. How are you doing, sir? Mark Spence.

So Mark, I know you're going to, you're going to love, this is just like gearing him up, but, but let me finish this and then I'll give this to you, Mark, to go on. And we still have more of his email to react, but you have a fallacy of begging the question, which is when you're, you're trying, you start with a conclusion and you have to accept the conclusion to be able to understand it.

So what he, what he's saying is they want to redefinite, re give a new definition to what a woman is, but only someone that holds to this redefinition is allowed to define it. That's begging the question.

Both are fallacies. And anytime you have a logical fallacy, that means that the argument you're making, placing forward is illogical and invalid. And so his argument is invalid. In fact, I bet, I bet that Dr. Cornell can define and tell us what a cat is and he doesn't need to ask a cat.

Common Sense, Truth, and the Wrath of God

Mark, what do you, what do you think about this?

Listen, Bill Murray had said, common sense is so rare these days that it should be classified as a superpower. We are seeing really the, the death of common sense inside of our lifetime for somebody not to be able to define what a woman is, is beyond insanity.

It's as John MacArthur would say, we are experiencing the wrath of God. Really the first step of experiencing the wrath and the judgment of God is for God to take a step back because the heart of man is so deceitful and desperately wicked above all things that without God, man will just implode.

Right. And so we are seeing a step further than that. And we are seeing God pour down his wrath upon the nations in America specifically. You know, I, my prayer has kind of been different lately. You know, I, it's like, do I, do I pray for mercy?

Do I pray for grace? Do I say God in the midst of judgment, remember mercy, remember that we're but dust. You know, I don't want, you know, the white picket fence life on my way to heaven. Right. David Brainerd said, help me not to loiter on my way to heaven.

Right. So I want to be active. I want to be inspired. I want to step out of the boat. Right. It doesn't matter how tumultuous the storm is when your eyes are on the Lord. And when we do see things like this, I think that it is enough to light a fire underneath us.

You know, before the, this presidential election, my, one of my sons had asked me, dad, who do you think is going to win the election? And I said, you know, I think that Trump will win the election unless he is elevated to a savior-like status.

And if that be the case, I can't imagine God allowing that to get through. So we are seeing the religious right and conservatives and Christians are like coming along and they were raising Trump up to a status that he did not deserve.

Right. That belongs to, not a president, but a King, the King of Kings. And regardless of who's president, Jesus will always be King. And he demonstrated that back then as not allowing him to take office, but allowing a fudgesicle to take office.

Right. A man who has no idea where he's at. And I actually say that very respectfully, that he doesn't know what planet he is on. Yeah. It's elder abuse.

It really is that, you know, bring him out there and let him stay home with his family. And, and.

Cause he's not in good health. I mean, it's evident. With that line of thinking, that's even scarier because if Trump had a savior status in 2020, imagine what people are going to be viewing him as in 2024, if not him and DeSantis or whoever, whatever conservative has a backbone who's willing to be president, people are going to be crying out like they're crying out to the Lord for this person to save them from this nonsense.

And I do agree with you. If it's Trump, it's going.

To be oof. Yes. Listen, I have a friend who is very close to Trump and he would get a phone call during his devotions and it would say, please hold for the president of the United States. And he'd put his family devotions on hold as Trump would get on the phone.

And like every other word was just the F-bomb. So his kids were excited that Trump was calling. And this was a regular basis thing where my friend was writing on Air Force One with the president. He's very, very close without mentioning his name and he would have to take Trump off of speaker.

So his kids would stop. I mean, they're thinking they're listening to Gordon Ramsey as he's trying to plan out a meal, he's planning out the future. And I go, look, this guy, I don't know much. I don't know too much about Trump other than I did vote for him because he was more aligned to my ideologies.

And if DeSantis takes it or if Trump takes it, I'm going to vote for either one of them, right? Whoever gets the ticket, I'm going to be voting for them. But when it comes to things like this, back to this whole idea of gender, right?

I don't know if you realize, but I had produced a video on gender, what is a woman about a month and a half ago or so. It has like a million hits, a little more than a million hits on our YouTube channel.

It's absolutely ridiculous. People think that I doctored up the YouTube channel. I removed all the people that didn't make sense and I wanted to have it cater to what I was going towards. And it wasn't like that at all.

I put all four people that I interviewed inside the YouTube channel. And this is the insanity of Southern California thinking as people cannot define what a woman is. We have, and I think we're experiencing that, that the loonies are running the insane asylum, right?

That's what's taking place. But we must not lose focus of why we're here, right? And it's really what Jesus was to seek and save that which is lost because it's very easy to get discouraged or disquieted or disgruntled in the midst of all that's happening.

Let's.

Stick with our marching orders. One of our members, Jason Cave says, MacArthur's closing sermon at this year's Truth Matters was right on target as we are as a nation experiencing God's judgment. And MacArthur's closing sermon was basically, Mark, you were there.

It was basically like, yeah, we expect these things and we give them the gospel. We have a broader view than just politics.

And you notice the way he closed off his sermon when we were there, he closed it off with just a worship song that the Christian can sing in the midst of the storm, right? Our hope is not in government or establishing here and now God's kingdom.

We want to elevate Christ and allow all the cards to fall where they may, but we occupy until he comes, which is simply we do vote. We do get involved inside the conversation. And there are certain people that have stepped up to have a voice.

I don't agree with Mark Dever. And I just hung out with Mark Dever last week, but I don't agree with him when he had said that the local church should not get involved in politics. I give him a mulligan with that.

I do think that you have the church that is looking to the pastors and the elders, overseers and the bishops to say, where do we go from here? How do we navigate these murky waters? So if we're not answering questions like this, they're going to go to the world to try to make sense of their worldview and the world does not have common sense.

Anymore. This is where, and let me ask you, the video you referred to, is it this gender is fluid until you bring this up? Yeah. That's the one. Okay. So that's, so I'll link that in the show notes for the podcast.

But, you know, one of the things is, is that when we look at this, you know, a lot of people, like Les, you, you referred to, you know, the, the recent documentary, what is a woman and when that came out and, you know, Mark, in the, in the comments, I saw that you had said a woman is an adult female, right?

And that's, that's the conclusion of, of that whole documentary. And so you look at this and, and this is, this is, I think what you're saying, Mark, when the world gives the answers, it's, they're, they're giving an answer from a worldly perspective.

You know, my answer to the question, what is a woman? What God calls a woman. Sure. Right. And that's where I think we as Christians have to be different. We're not, we don't answer with a, with a worldly answer.

We, we give a biblical answer and, you know, Chris here, Chris Honhold says, excellent point, Mark. The Bible informs that, informs all that we do, including what we ought, including how we ought to vote.

So let me, let me, let me finish up with this, Dr. Cornell's, the rest of his email. He says, he ends up saying one last thing. I saw the copyright takedown. I think that's what actually prompted him to contact me.

I, I saw, I, I saw the copyright takedown on the video in my conversation with, with Jensen that I posted. My apologies among YouTube communities that I'm familiar with. Sorry, in, in, in, I lost my place now.

Sorry. Sorry. So let me just, I'll back up in, in my apologies among the YouTube communities I'm familiar with. It's general practice that if someone appears on one channel, they're welcome to mirror that appearance to their own channel.

Generally, it's common courtesy to do it a week or two later rather than the next day. If that's not your policy on Apologetics Live, you, you would like me to make it private. I'd be happy to do that.

No problem. I'd appreciate it if you'd withdraw the copyright claim so that I can do that rather than having the video formally taken down. Basically my response to him was to inform him that, you know, no, it's, it's not YouTube's community.

Mark, you, you guys at Living Waters deal a lot with, with YouTube. You guys have these big bad, I think, what are you like a 1 billion uh, downloads or something? Some ridiculous, I know you got over a million subscribers, right?